Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe 9781838672645, 9781838672638, 9781838672652

Citation preview

LIFELONG LEARNING AND THE ROMA MINORITY IN WESTERN AND SOUTHERN EUROPE

This page intentionally left blank

LIFELONG LEARNING AND THE ROMA MINORITY IN WESTERN AND SOUTHERN EUROPE

EDITED BY

ANDREA ÓHIDY University of Education in Freiburg, Germany

and KATALIN R. FORRAY University Pécs, Hungary

United Kingdom – North America – Japan – India – Malaysia – China

Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2020 Selection and editorial matter © 2020 Andrea Óhidy and Katalin R. Forray. Published under exclusive licence. Individual chapters © 2020 Authors Reprints and permissions service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-83867-264-5 (Print) ISBN: 978-1-83867-263-8 (Online) ISBN: 978-1-83867-265-2 (Epub)

Contents

List of Figures and Tables

vii

About the Contributors

ix

Acknowledgements

xii

Introduction: Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy

1

Chapter 1  Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights: Roma ­Organisations, Policy Frameworks and European Institutions Natascha Hofmann

15

Chapter 2  Dawn of Learning! Sinti and Roma in Germany Natascha Hofmann

27

Chapter 3  Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries: The Greek Case Panagiota Gkofa

45

Chapter 4  The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children in Italy: Pathways to School Inclusion Valeria Cavioni

67

Chapter 5  The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway Kari Hagatun

95

Chapter 6  The Roma Population in Portugal: A Changing Picture Pedro Calado, Liliana José Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos

117

vi   Contents

Chapter 7  Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain Through Successful Educational Actions Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon

139

Chapter 8  Roma in the Educational System of Sweden: Achievements after Year 2000 and Challenges for the Future Christina Rodell Olgaç

163

Conclusion: Participation and Success of European Roma in Education and Lifelong Learning: Common Challenge, Similar Solutions and Hitherto Unsatisfactory Results Andrea Óhidy

183

Index

203

List of Figures and Tables

Figures Fig. 4.1 Fig. 6.1. Fig. 6.2. Fig. 6.3.

Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Populations Prevalence in Italy. Portuguese Roma by Municipality (Absolute Numbers). Portuguese Roma by Municipality (Relative Numbers). Top 20 Cities with the Highest Number of Portuguese Roma.

69 120 121 122

Tables Table 2.1. Educational Achievements of Sinti and Roma in Germany 1982–2011.33 Table 4.1. Main Causes That May Interfere with Regular School Attendance in Italy. 79 Table 4.2. Key Principles to Promote a National Model for Inclusion in Italy. 83 Table 4.3. SMILE Project Recommendations for School Inclusion of Roma Pupils in Italy. 85 Table 4.4. Key Areas of the Matrix Project in Italy. 86 Table 4.5. Main Targets of the Sar San 2.0 Project in Italy. 87

This page intentionally left blank

About the Contributors

Jelen Amador-López (Spain) is a Community of Research on Excellence for All (CREA) member. She did her PhD in Sociology (University of Barcelona) focussed on the Roma women and how they are taking the lead to overcome social and gender inequalities. She is a Roma Researcher and Editorial Assistant of the International Sociology Journal since 2015. Fernando Macías Aranda (Spain) is an Assistant Professor (School of Education, University of Barcelona, UB). He did his PhD in Education (UB). He is a Roma researcher, Member of the Integrated Plan for the Roma People in Catalonia (Catalan Government) and Spanish Representative in the ‘Doctoral & Early Career Network’ (World Educational Research Association). Adriana Aubert Simon (Spain) is a Professor in the Department of Sociology (University of Barcelona, UB.). She did her PhD in Education (UB), is a Member of the Board of the European Sociological Association (ESA) Research Network of Sociology of Education and Co-editor of International Journal of Sociology of Education (Web of Science). Pedro Calado (Portugal) is the High Commissioner for Migration and National Co-ordinator of `Choices’ Program (Programa Escolhas) – a government programme. He did a BA (Honors) in Geography from the Classic University of Lisbon, specialisation in Education and received an MA in Geography from the Classic University of Lisbon/University of Sheffield, specialising in ‘Exclusion, Society and Territory’. Valeria Cavioni (Italy) is a Licenced Psychologist, Psychotherapist and Post­ doctoral Researcher at the Department of Human Sciences for Education at the University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan. She is the Chair for the European Network for Social and Emotional Competence (ENSEC) and Member of the Network of Experts on Social Dimension of Education and Training (Neset II) for the European Commission. Sónia Costa (Portugal) is a Graduate in Sociology and Planning (2006). She did an MA in Sociology (2010) by ISCTE and doctoral studies at ICS University of Lisbon, developing a doctoral thesis on the Romani law. She performed extensive research experience primarily in Social Policies Evaluation. Katalin R. Forray (Hungary) is a Doctor of Hungarian Academy of Sciences and Founder of the Doctoral School for Education and the Department of Romani

x    About the Contributors Studies at the University Pécs. She is a Member of Hungarian and international organisations for Roma. Her research interests include integration of minorities, multiculturalism, social and regional factors of education, and women in education. Margarida Gaspar de Matos (Portugal) is a Clinical and Health Psychologist, Full Professor (with Aggregation in International Health) at the Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon. She is a Coordinator of G2 Group – Supportive Environments in the Research Centre of the Institute of Environmental Health, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon. She is the Convenor of the Board of Prevention and Intervention of European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations and Member of the Steering Committee of European Public Health Association/Child and Adolescent Public Health. Panagiota Gkofa (Greece) holds a PhD diploma in Education Research-­Sociology of Education from King’s College London (UK). Her doctoral study investigated the educational success of some Roma university students in Greece. Her research interest is in the sociology of education and education policy. Kari Hagatun (Norway) is a PhD Candidate at the Department of Education, University of Bergen. Her research interest lies at the junction of minority issues, ethnography, critical theory and educational policy. Her research focusses on the educational situation for Norwegian Roma pupils through the perspectives of children, parents and teachers. Natascha Hofmann (Germany) is a Lecturer at IES Abroad EU Centre and the University of Education in Freiburg. Her focusses are on the pedagogy of migration, mechanisms of discrimination and diversity. Furthermore, she is engaged in a qualification programme for Sinti and Roma educational advisors. She is currently writing her dissertation on Romnja educational biographies. Liliana José Moreira (Portugal) is a Senior Technician of the Cabinet of Support to the Roma Communities/High Commission for Migrations. She is a Graduate and Doctoral Student in Sociology at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities/ University of Porto. Her MA is in Social Development and Social Inclusion at the School of Economics and Management/University of Porto. Andrea Óhidy (Germany), Dipl. Päd. Dr. Andrea Óhidy, is a Professor and Head of the Institute of Education Sciences at the University of Education in Freiburg. Her research interests include educational policy in the European Union, Lifelong Learning and educational participation of Roma. She has published in these areas in German, Hungarian and English. Christina Rodell Olgaç (Sweden) is a PhD, Associate Professor in Education at Södertörn University. Her research focusses specifically on higher education and social mobility among Roma. In tandem with Angelina Dimiter-Taikon, MA in Education, she has developed courses for Romani mediators in schools and social work, for and mother tongue teachers. Celeste Simões (Portugal) is a PhD, Assistant Professor with Aggregation at Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, University of Lisbon. She holds a BA in

About the Contributors    xi Special Education and Rehabilitation, an MA in Social Psychology at Faculty of Psychology, University of Porto and a PhD in Special Education – Risk Behaviour in Adolescence, Aggregation in Education Sciences – Resilience at Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, University of Lisbon. She is a member of the Instituto de Saúde Ambiental (ISAMB) (Institute of Environmental Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon). Teresa Sordé-Martí (Spain) is a Professor (department of Sociology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, UAB), is a Harvard doctorate holder. She has published in the world’s highest impact journal Nature, among others (Web of Science). She is part of the editorial board of the European Commission launched Toolkit for Schools, part of the School Education Gateway portal.

Acknowledgements

English proofreading: Michael Forrest Baxter, Lia Boldt, Mary Carmody, Robin Valerie Cathey, Matthias Eickhoff, Nina Ortmann, Eva-Maria Strittmatter and John Ziesemer. Special thanks to: Michael Forrest Baxter, Lia Boldt, Mary Carmody, Robin Valerie Cathey, Carmel Cefai, Matthias Eickhoff, Katarzyna Jagielska, Solvejg Jobst, Tamás Kozma, Nina Ortmann, Ludmila Rigova, Eva-Maria Strittmatter, Kerstin Wedekämper and John Ziesemer.

Introduction: Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy Abstract This introduction from Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy provides a brief overview of the social and education situation of European Roma and also about the structure of this book. Roma are here described as a ‘hidden minority’ (see the country study about Italy from Valeria Cavioni), because – although they are the largest minority group living in Europe for more than a hundred years – we still know very little about them. Although most of the Roma people have been living for centuries in European countries, their situation is still different from the non-Roma population; they often suffered from poverty and exclusion. There is a host of Roma, especially in Southern and in Eastern Europe, who is considered to be the most disadvantaged group in European societies, for example, regarding their (1) health situation, (2) on the labour and (3) on the housing market and (4) also in education. Questions of education are the central elements of politics making the situation of Roma better. To fulfil these requirements some European countries have taken determined steps. As Natascha Hofmann in the country study about Germany wrote, we are in the phase of the ‘dawn of learning’ because there are more and more policies and programs to develop attainment and success of Roma in European education and lifelong learning. This book gives an overview about retrospective and prospective tendencies in the situation of European Roma in education and lifelong learning. Keywords: Roma; Southern Europe; Western Europe; policy; lifelong learning; education

Access, attainment and success of Roma people in education and lifelong learning is one of the most urgent public policy issues in Europe. According to

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 1–14 Copyright © 2020 by Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191004

2    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy empirical data Roma people are the most underrepresented group in schools and other educational institutions. The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) found in its survey about the situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States (2014) that although the situation has been improved for younger age groups – there are still considerable differences between Roma and non-Roma students at all levels of the education system (EU-FRA, 2014a). This book takes a look at the education situation of Roma across Western and Southern Europe. In the following section we provide a brief overview about their social and education situation.

Roma: A ‘Hidden Minority’ Although Roma people are the largest minority group living in Europe for more than a hundred years, we still know very little about them.1 There is a general lack of information and knowledge about Roma in public awareness. Therefore, Valeria Cavioni calls Roma a ‘hidden minority’ (see page 67 onwards in this book). Traditionally there is a repugnance against getting to know Roma people better, because they are often described stereotypically. Prejudice has accompanied the European Roma through their history since they arrived at the continent. Antiziganism can be seen as a part of European history (Agarin, 2014; Kóczé & Rövid 2017; Selling, End, Kyuchukov, Laskar, & Templer, 2015; Tosi Cambini & Beluschi Fabeni, 2017), which is not very often reflected in public discussion or taught in schools. There are also a host of blind spots in scientific research regarding Roma, which precludes thorough discussion of their (education) situation. This book wants to change this and gives an overview about retrospective and prospective tendencies in the situation of European Roma in education and lifelong learning. According to current estimates there are about 10–12 million Roma living in Europe, among them about 6–7 million in the European Union (European Commission, 2011). Despite the increasing public interest in statistical information on Roma, there are a number of reasons why it is impossible to collect and distribute exact data on this minority group: Firstly, in official statistics the category ‘ethnicity’ is mostly not recorded because in many European countries ethnic registration is forbidden. Secondly, even if there are empirical data about them, it is often not clear, how is the identification with the category ‘Roma’ operationalised. Are we speaking about ‘nationality’, ‘ethnicity’ or ‘mother tongue’? Thirdly, a host of Roma attempt to conceal their membership to this minority because of the negative experiences they have had and the resulting stigmatisation and discrimination which they face.2 Hence there are big differences regarding the number of Roma according to their internal terms and based on external designation.

1

For example, most European people do not know anything about the Roma-­ Holocaust (see the country study from Hofmann in this book). 2 The attitude of Roma organisations to official statistics is different: Some of them refuse any kind of data collection because they are concerned that such statistics could

Introduction    3 In scientific research the principle of self-designation is usually rejected as unreliable (Janka, Vincze, Ádány, & Sándor, 2018; Kemény, 1997). According to external designation persons are defined as ‘Roma’ when their social environment recognises and handles them as Roma. János Ladányi differentiates between two main forms of external designation: In the first case the researcher ask so called experts (i. e. teachers, social workers or police people), who know the persons, which should be categorised very well, who are Roma in their opinion. The problem with this categorisation method is that it convolutes poverty with Roma ethnicity and with problematic behaviour (from the point of view of the major society). In the second case people who conduct the survey determine who is defined as Roma. This method is considered to be very useful for research studies about assimilated Roma, but a disadvantage of this method is that the interviewees can meet the persons to be categorised only during the survey and therefore their attribution is based only on very limited information (Ladányi, 2009, p. 44ff). In everyday understanding the external description of ‘Roma’ is neither based on their ethnicity nor on their mother tongue, rather people are defined as ‘Roma’ who ‘live like the gypsies’: in poverty, in bad living conditions, in segregation and unemployment. This means, on the one hand, that people who could be described as ‘Roma’ by the characteristic of their ethnicity, but do not live segregated, are not unemployed or poor, were not defined as ‘Roma’ from their social environment. On the other hand, people who are not Roma by the trait of ethnicity but live in poverty are considered as ‘Roma’ (Ladányi, 2009; Ligeti, 2002). The term ‘Roma’ is thus strongly associated with deprivation and burdened with strong prejudices. The Roma culture is often equated with poverty in everyday life (Farkas, 2002 in Szoboszlai, 2006). The current public discussion – both on national as well as on the international level – mostly focuses on their difficult socio-economic situation. János Ladányi therefore states that ‘being Roma is nothing else but ethicized poverty’ (Ladányi, 2009, p. 11). Another problem is that the inner diversity of the Roma minority is seldom recognised in statistical and empirical data or in scientific studies.3 Roma in Europe are a very heterogeneous minority group regarding their cultural, linguistic and religious diversity or settlement forms. Roma communities – not having any mother country – have always lived scattered in countries with different historical traditions and social-cultural background, so they can be found almost in every European country. As a result of this, the European Roma minority is especially colourful. Despite this diversity there is a ‘Roma identity’, which is

be the first step of government action against them. Others tend to accept the need of central registers if the data collection involves government guarantees against Roma discrimination and antiziganism. On the other hand, there are some Roma politicians who prefer setting up statistics which help to get real information about the situation of Roma and to create policy measures to deal with them (Forray, 2009). 3 These problems are characteristic not only for data of the European Union but also for national and regional surveys and studies.

4    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy based on a Sanskrit rooted common language Romani/Chib (with a broad variety of dialects), on recognition of a common origin from India, on similar norms, values and traditions, but also on common historical and current experiences of stigmatisation, discrimination and exclusion. Roma have proclaimed themselves as a unified non-territorial transnational nation,4 which includes different subgroups. Although the Council of Europe recognises five main Roma groups (Council of Europe, 2012), these can be further divided into various subgroups whose exact number is uncertain. There are a host of different names (both internal and external) for them, which can diverge in different countries, like Roma, Romani people, Sinti, Gypsy, Kaale Roma/Kale/Kalo, Kelderash/Kaldashari, Polska Roma, Lovara, Manuš, Caminanti, Vlach/Vlah/Vlax, Vlachike or Walachian Roma, Boyasch, Romungro/Rumungro, Servike Roma, Ungrike Roma, Bergitka Roma, Carpathian Roma, Zigeuner, Tsigganoi, Cigány, Žuže, Degeša, Bougešti, Ferkosi, Drizari, Kalaidzhii, Gradesh, Laho, Fichiri, Yerlii, Burgudzhii, Gitano, Turkish Roma, Horahane Roma. In this book we use the term ‘Roma’ or ‘Roma people’ because the first World Romani Congress (1971)5 and the Council of Europe (2012)6 have a current consensus accepting and using this term, but the different country studies might use other terms according to their national and/ or regional traditions.

The Roma Minority in Selected Western and Southern European Countries This book discusses the education situation of Roma in seven Western and Southern European countries: Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Sweden and Spain. Six of them are members of the European Union,7 all of them are members of the Schengen agreement. Almost 70% of the European Roma live in the middle- and eastern parts of the continent as well as in the countries of the former Soviet Union. The most significant presence of Roma can be found, among others, in Bulgaria, Romania and in Slovakia where they form about 9–11% of the whole population. Regarding the absolute numbers, Romania has the largest Roma population, estimated between 1.5 and 2 million people or more. Another 400,000 to one million Roma live in Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, Spain and there are more than 100,000 in Greece, Germany and Italy as well.

4

Delegation for Roma Issues Fact Sheet, JU 2006:10. The first World Romani Congress was organized in Orpington near London in 1971. It was attended by representatives from nine nations (Czechoslovakia, Finland, Norway, France, Great Britain, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Spain and Yugoslavia) and observers from Belgium, Canada, India and the United States. For further information see: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=World+Romani+Congress 6 Council of Europe. (2012). Descriptive Glossary of terms relating to Roma issues. Version dated 18 May 2012. http://a.cs.coe.int/team20/cahrom/documents/Glossary% 20Roma%20EN%20version%2018%20May%202012.pdf 7 Norway is no Member State of the European Union. 5

Introduction    5 The here discussed Southern European countries – Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain – are often called Mediterranean states and characterised on the one hand through their climate: hot dry summers and wet cool winters. On the other hand, there are also concepts since the period of the Enlightenment to describe this region as a political-cultural-economical unit.8 Although – as the member of an international scientific conference ‘The South in Postwar Europe: Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal’9 stated – it is very difficult to speak of a Southern European exceptionalism because the similarities with Western and Eastern Europe are more characteristic than the differences (Del Pero and Torcal in Trautsch, 2013, p. 6ff). Most of the so-called Mediterranean states are member of the European Union and Southern European countries are very heterogeneous. Nevertheless, the above mentioned four states are often characterised through their common economic situation. This is described as vulnerable – especially after adopting the common European currency Euro – through big state-debt, deficits in public sector accountability and deep-rooted problems of inefficiency and corruption.10 Therefore in economical journals they are often referred to as ‘PIGS’.11 Another common characteristic seems to be the role of the family in providing social security12 (Martin in Trautsch, 2013, p. 7), which is also true for their relatively large Roma population. On the one hand Roma are usually full citizens and have been living in the region for centuries. On the other hand, there were migration waves in the mid-1990s, for example, to Italy after the collapse of communist regimes in Eastern European countries, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, but also after the Eastern enlargement of the European Union from Albania, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Kosovo and Montenegro. These people

8

To coordinate the regional cooperation in the area in 2008 the “Union for the Mediterranean” was founded. For more details see: https://ufmsecretariat.org/ 9 ‘The South in Postwar Europe: Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal’. Internationale Tagung, veranstaltet vom Deutschen Historischen Institut Rom und der Universität Basel, 27–28 Juni 2013.Tagungsbericht von Jasper M. Trautsch. http://dhi-roma.it/ fileadmin/user_upload/pdf-dateien/Tagungsberichte/2013/TB_South_in_Postwar_ Europe_20130627_28.pdf 10 Historically Nützenadel characterises the Southern European states through their ‘late industrial development, the persistence of agriculture, low labor productivity, balance of payment deficits, high public debts, and state institutions comparatively weak in collecting taxes and providing infrastructure and social welfare’ (Nützenadel inTrautsch, 2013, pp. 7). 11 The acronym ‘PIGS’ was first mentioned in the 1990s und regularly used, for example, by the magazine Financial Times to describe Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain as the European Union states with the weakest economies. In 2008, after its banking crisis, Ireland has been added to them and the acronym became ‘PIIGS’. See for example: N. N. (2008): Pigs in muck. In Financial Times, 1. September 2008. https://www. ft.com/content/5faf0b0a-778a-11dd-be24-0000779fd18c 12 However, there is no empirical proof, whether this strong family solidarity exists because of the limited public welfare or the other way around.

6    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy have mostly an uncertain legal status. One of Europe’s largest Roma populations lives in Spain. According to Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon, the family is the pillar on which most Romani values rest – such as solidarity, closeness, collaboration and reciprocal support – which are very strong, also because of their common experience of discrimination and exclusion (see page 139 in this book). Panagiota Gkofa also describes collectivity and familiar supports as a significant value in the Greek Roma community, where the majority of people are poor, highly marginalised and frequently live in extreme conditions at the edges of urban areas (Kostouli & Mitakidou, 2009, see page 45 in this book). Valeria Cavioni stressed that from the Roma point of view, the Italian school system is a symbol of a hostile society that forces cultural assimilation instead of valuing a plurality of ethnic identities (Senato della Republica, 2011, see page 79 in this book). Pedro Calado, Liliana Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos state about the situation of Roma in Portugal that ‘the theme which is essential to approach is ethnic discrimination’ (see page 127 in this book). This problem is characteristic not only for the other Southern European countries but for the whole of Europe. The here discussed Western European countries – such as Germany, Norway and Sweden – are with the exception of Norway, EU Member States and part of the Schengen agreement. These countries, especially in comparison with Eastern and Southern Europe, have smaller Roma minorities. These are on the one hand more disadvantaged than the non-Roma but have a much better social situation than Roma in Southern or Eastern Europe. For example in Sweden – although the social situation of the Roma minority is still characterised by social, economic and political exclusion and marginalisation and their life expectancy and living standards are comparatively lower than that of the average Swede – ‘the level of exclusion may be different though, since the welfare systems assure that no-one, including marginalized Roma families, falls below a certain poverty line’ (SOU, 2010: 55, p. 35–36, see page 163 in this book). In Norway Roma people often depend on social welfare benefits but they also have difficulties claiming their rights because they are often unable to require information, fill out forms and answer letters. Therefore, they usually receive limited understanding and assistance from public services (see page 95 in this book). In Germany there are also negative sentiments against Roma, but they also are recognised as a national minority. There is a constant Roma migration from Southern and Eastern Europe to Western Europe because of their better living conditions, especially since the 1990s: After the Fall of the Iron Curtain, the Romanian Revolution and the disintegration of Yugoslavia, a host of Roma has moved from Romania, Bosnia and Kosovo, applying for asylum, for example, in Germany. According to Natascha Hofmann, some of them have received an unlimited residence permit or have become German citizens. Others were forcibly sent back on the basis of return policies and treaties with their country of origin (see page 30 in this book). After the Eastern enlargement of the European Union (2004–2007) a host of Roma migrated from the new Member States, for example, Romania and

Introduction    7 Bulgaria, to Western Europe, because the Schengen agreement allows them as EU citizens to live in all Member States.

Disadvantages and Multiple Deprivations Roma in Europe are not only the biggest minority but also the most disadvantaged (European Commission, 2004; EU-FRA, 2012, 2014b). Although most of the Roma people have been living for centuries in European countries, their situation is still different from the non-Roma population; they often suffered from poverty and exclusion. There is a host of Roma, especially in Southern and in Eastern Europe, who are considered as the most disadvantaged group in European societies, for example, regarding their (1) health situation, (2) on the labour, (3) on the housing market and (4) also in education: 1. According to research findings on a national and international level, the European Roma minority usually has a less healthy lifestyle and its health situation is much worse than of the non-Roma population. Roma people regularly suffer from higher rates of chronic diseases and infant mortality and have lower life expectancies than the rest of European societies. For example in Sweden, according to a Government Report health problems start earlier, there are life style related health problems dating back from the times before Roma were resident and life expectancy is judged to be clearly below average. (SOU, 2010: 55, see page 165 in this book) 2. There is also a significant gap in employment opportunities on the labour market between Roma and non-Roma: For example, in Portugal a representative survey from 2014 showed that 18% of the Roma respondents were active with profession/work and 57% of them were unemployed (see page 123 in this book). In Spain 36.4% of the active Roma population was unemployed in 2011, while only 20.9% of the majority society was in the same situation. According to the research findings of Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa SordéMartí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon Spanish Roma often find themselves caught in a cycle of poverty, which is associated with low levels of education and which negatively influences their access to the labour market. Researcher also identified a longstanding trend of ethnic discrimination practices regarding employment of Roma which have a high level of social acceptance (see page 143 in this book). These tendencies are also characteristic for most of the European Roma. It is therefore no wonder that Roma, for example, in Germany, often don’t reveal their ethnic affiliation to facilitate social mobility and participation and to prevent institutional discrimination (Jonuz, 2009, p. 290; Strauß, 2011, see page 31 in this book). 3. Disadvantageous housing conditions – dwelling status and available infrastructure – represent a major problem for most of the Roma people in

8    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy Western and Southern Europe. Not only substandard living conditions but also residential segregation and barriers to the subsidised and free housing market are characteristic for them. For example in Spain the Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality noted that in 2011 more than 60% of the Roma households experienced at least one of four difficulties relating to living conditions: (1) overcrowding; (2) leaks or damp in walls, floors, ceilings or foundations; rot in floors, windows or door frames; (3) lack of basic services or facilities (running water, hot water, toilets, showers or electrical installations) and (4) lack of public urban services (sewerage, public transport in the neighbourhood, rubbish collection, pavements, asphalted roads and public lighting) (see page 144 in this book). In Italy spatial isolation has been turned into social isolation fostering spatial segregation of its inhabitants from the rest of the population (Tarnovschi, 2012; see page 74 in this book). Even in Norway Roma people are living segregated from the Norwegian society (AID, 2009; Engebrigtsen, 2015; see page 97 in this book). 4. The disadvantaged social situation of the European Roma minority is considered to come from their low level of participation and success in education and lifelong learning (EU-FRA, 2014a). This impedes their chances for employment and income prospects, but also for getting better housing conditions and having a good health status. These problems in turn have a negative impact on their access to, and attainment and success in, education.

‘Dawn of Learning’ for Roma in Europe Questions of education are the central elements of politics making the situation of Roma better. To fulfil these requirements some European countries have taken determined steps. As Natascha Hofmann wrote, we are in the phase of the ‘dawn of learning’ (see page 27 in this book) because there are more and more policies and programs to develop attainment and success of Roma in European education and lifelong learning. The idea of lifelong learning has become the most important educational paradigm of our times and also an umbrella term for educational political reform ambitions in the European Union over the last decades. Since, at the very latest, the proclamation of the European Year of Lifelong Learning in 1996, lifelong learning has been considered the only possible answer to the political and economic changes in modern times in Europe. According to the interpretation of different organisations of the European Union lifelong learning shall be the precondition for the sensitive, peaceful and democratic solution to the difficulties arising from political, social, and economic changes. As an educational policy concept, lifelong learning, through the extension of the socially mandatory learning period throughout one’s whole life, aims at changes in the individuals’ subjective biographies on the one side, and at political and structural changes in the whole society on the other (Óhidy, 2008). For individual learners lifelong learning is a cognitive process which starts in early childhood, ends in late old age, and includes formal or school education, non-formal learning

Introduction    9 (in self-organised, non-formal organisations, which do not award degrees) and informal learning, such as learning in one’s family, at one’s workplace, or in the wider social environment. (Harangi, 2003, p. 225) According to the European Report on Quality Indicators of Lifelong Learning it ‘comprises the continuous directed formal and informal activities whose aim is the development of knowledge and skills’ (Setényi, 2004, p. 21). Our focus in this book is mainly, but not exclusively, on formal education in the regular education system in each country. According to research findings, for example, of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the access, attainment and success levels of European Roma people in education and lifelong learning are significantly lower than those of the non-Roma population (EU-FRA, 2012, 2014a). To change this situation in 2005, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Romania, Serbia and the Slovak Republic declared the Decade of Roma Inclusion13 (2005–2015) and George Soros and the World Bank funded the Roma Education Fund14 to contribute to closing the gap in educational outcomes between Roma and non-Roma, including though desegregation of educational systems in Central and Eastern Europe, especially the countries that have formally joined the Decade of Roma Inclusion. (Surdu & Friedmann, 2013, p. 36) Twelve countries – Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain – took part in the Decade of Roma, while Slovenia, the United States, Norway and Moldova participated with an observer status. The policy measures were focussed on the following priority areas: health, education, employment and housing. In 2010, the European Commission’s Roma Task Force (European Commission, 2010b) emphasised the need for more and more effective measures for Roma inclusion. Therefore in 2011 the European Union decided to work out a specific Roma inclusion strategy to improve Roma inclusion and asked its Member States to develop national programs for it. The EU Framework (European Commission, 2011) raised Roma inclusion to the EU level for the first time and linked it with the Europe 2020 (European Commission, 2010a) strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The following goals were formulated regarding to access to education, employment, healthcare, housing and essential services:

13

It was adopted with Protocol 15.1/14.04.2005 of the Bulgarian Council of Ministers. http://www.romadecade.org/ 14 http://www.romaeducationfund.org/

10    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

Ensuring that all Roma children complete at least primary school. Cutting the employment gap between Roma and the rest of the population. Reducing the gap in health status between the Roma and the rest of the population. Closing the gap between the share of Roma with access to housing and to public utilities (such as water, electricity and gas) and that of the rest of the population (European Commission, 2014).

A public consultation on the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 202015 has found out that since 2011 there has been no major change regarding the situation of Roma in employment, healthcare, housing and discrimination, but there has been improvement in the education situation. This book shows these developments in selected Western and Southern European countries.

The Structure of the Book In this section we provide an overview of the individual chapters, highlighting common themes and structural similarities. The first group of chapters focusses on the most important policy measures for increasing attainment and success in education and lifelong learning for Roma in Europe. This introduction from Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy provides a brief overview about the social and education situation of European Roma and also about the structure of this book. Natascha Hofmann discusses the policy measures for improving the (education) situation of Roma in Europe. The second group of chapters discusses the education situation of Roma in seven Western and Southern European countries: Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden, which are presented in alphabetical order. The country studies have a common structure according to the following guidelines: 1. Describing of the situation of the Roma minority in the selected country a. Number, groups, names, legal status b. Social situation c. Culture and language/s 2. Roma in the education system a. The education system of the selected country b. Educational attainment of the Roma ⦁ ⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

15

in elementary schools in secondary schools at colleges and universities in adult education

Public Consultation on the Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020, ran from 19 July 2017 to 25 October 2017. https:// ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-evaluation-eu-framework-­ national-roma-integration-strategies-2020_en

Introduction    11 3. Policies and support programmes for Roma education in the selected country. 4. Presentation of a/n (own) study about a successful programme. The country studies express the opinion of the authors which are not necessarily in accordance with those of the editorial team and the publisher. In the concluding chapter we return to the central theme of the book with regard to similarities and differences of education and lifelong learning for Roma in different national contexts and within the wider European context. These themes are considered in relation to the issues addressed in the country studies, including the social economic challenges, the policies and programmes to change the current situation for the better but also the problems and challenges in research and practice, towards Roma inclusion. Evidence from the country studies is used to explore the similarities in the challenges to increase the participation and success of Roma people across (Western and Southern) Europe.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank all contributors, especially the authors of the country studies. They are experts who often not only describe and analyze the (education) situation of the Roma minority in their countries but also take part in policymaking, program-developing and practical realization to improve the Roma inclusion policies of the European Union. Some of them are members of the Roma minority themselves. This allows an important new scientific perspective: not only to write about Roma but to let them participate in discourses about themselves. The editors hope that this participation will increase in the future. All chapters of this book underwent a blind peer review process by two colleagues. We also had some kind help from native speakers. We would like to thank them all for their marvellous work! Special thanks to Michael Forrest Baxter, Lia Boldt, Mary Carmody, Robin Valerie Cathey, Carmel Cefai, Matthias Eickhoff, Katarzyna Jagielska, Solvejg Jobst, Tamás Kozma, Nina Ortmann, Ludmila Rigova, Eva-Maria Strittmatter, Kerstin Wedekämper and John Ziesemer for their kind help.

References AID (Norwegian Ministry for Work and Inclusion). (2009). Action plan for improvement of the living conditions of Roma in Oslo. Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/SAMI/Nasjmin/ Handlingsplan_rom_EN.pdf Agarin, T. (Ed.). (2014). When stereotype meets prejudice: Antiziganism in European societies. Stuttgart, Germany: Ibidem Press. Council of Europe. (2012). Estimates and official numbers of Roma in Europe, Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.

12    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy CREA. (2010). Gitanos: de los mercadillos a la escuela y del instituto al futuro. [Gypsies: from the street markets to the school and from the High School to the future.] Madrid, Spain: Ministry of Education.. Instituto de Formación del Profesorado, Investigación e Innovación educativa (IFIIE). Retrieved from http://www.mecd. gob.es/dctm/ministerio/educacion/ifiie/lineas-investigacion-innovacion/educacionintercultural/publicaciones-informes/publicaciones/gitanos-mercadillos-escuelasinstitutos?documentId=0901e72b807b22e8 Delegation for Roma Issues. (2006, June 10). Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from http:// arkiv.minoritet.se/romadelegationen/www.romadelegationen.se/dynamaster/file_arc hive/080924/8649012cecd4affc58173c3a2dcbfc84/Infofolder_engelsk_080904.pdf Engebrigtsen, A. (2015). Educating the Roma: The struggle for cultural autonomy in a seminomadic group in Norway. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 115–125. doi:10.17645 /si.v3i5.275 European Commission. (2004). The situation of Roma in an enlarged European Union. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. Retrieved from https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/ publication/b628783f-622a-4e33-9133141329672d6e/language-en European Commission. (2010a). EUROPE 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. COM (2010) 2020 Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http:// ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET% 20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-% 20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf European Commission. (2010b). European Commission to assess Member States’ use of European Union funds for Roma integration. Press release form Strasbourg, September 7, 2010. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-10-1097_ en.htm European Commission. (2011). An EU framework for national Roma integration strategies up to 2020. COM (2011) 173 final. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from https:// eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52011DC0173 European Commission. (2014). Memo: Roma integration – 2014 Commission assessment: Questions and answers. Brussels, Belgium. Press release from April 4, 2014. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-249_en.htm European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2012). The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States: Survey results at a glance. Retrieved from http:// fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/situation-roma-11-eu-member-states-surveyresults-glance European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2014a). Roma survey – Data in focus education: The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Luxembourg, Europe: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from http:// fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014_roma-survey_education_tk0113748enc.pdf European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2014b). Roma survey – Data in focus poverty and employment: The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Vienna, Austria: European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-roma-survey-employment_en.pdf Forray, R. K. (2009). The situation of the Roma/Gypsy communities in Hungary. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/1476319/RomainHungary Harangi, L. (2003, October 16–19). A lifelong learning paradigma és hatása. [The effects of the lifelong learning paradigm.] In J. Mayer & P. Singer (Eds.), A tanulás kora. [The age of learning.] Felnőttoktatási Akadémia, Gyula 2002. Budapest, Hungary: Országos Közoktatási Intézet Felnőttoktatási és Kisebbségi Központ. Janka, E. A., Vincze, F., Ádány, R., & Sándor, J. (2018). Is the definition of Roma an important matter? The parallel application of self and external classification of ethnicity in a population-based health interview survey. International Journal of

Introduction    13 Environmental Research and Public Health, 15, 353–375. Retrieved from https:// www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/15/2/353/pdf Jonuz, E. (2009). Stigma: Ethnizität [Stigma: Ethnicity.]. Opladen, Leverkusen: Budrich Verlag. Kemény, I. (1997). A magyarországi roma (cigány) népességről két felmérés tükrében. [The Hungarian Roma (Gypsy) population in two surveys.] In Magyar Tudomány CIV, új évfolyam XLII, S. (pp. 644–655). Kóczé, A., & Rövid, M. (2017). Roma and the politics of double discourse in contemporary Europe. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 24(6), 684–700. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2017.1380338 Kostouli, T., & Mitakidou, S. (2009). Policies as top-down structures versus as lived realities: An investigation of literacy policies in Greek schools. In S. Mitakidou, E. Tressou, B. B. Swadener, & C. A. Grant (Eds.), Beyond pedagogies of exclusion in diverse childhood contexts: Transnational challenges (pp. 47–63). New York, NY: Macmillan. Ladányi, J. (2009). A burkolt szelekciótól a nyílt diszkriminációig. [From hidden selection to open discrimination.]. Budapest, Hungary: MTA Történettudományi Intézet – MTA Társadalomkutató Központ. Ligeti, G. (2002). Kikről van szó? [Who are they?] In G. Bernáth, R. K. Forray, G. Ligeti, E. Mohácsi, & B. Wizner (Eds.), Esélyek és korlátok. A magyarországi cigányközösség az ezredfordulón. [Chances and limits. The Gypsy community in Hungary at the millennium.] (pp. 9–15). Pécs: Pécsi Tudományegyetem, Romológia és Nevelésszociológia Tanszék. Óhidy, A. (2008). Lifelong learning: Interpretations of an education policy in Europe. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften: Wiesbaden. Selling, J., End, M., Kyuchukov, H., Laskar, P., & Templer, B. (Eds.). (2015). Antiziganism. What’s in a word? Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgescholars.com/download/sample/62401 Senato della Repubblica. (2011). Sintesi del rapporto conclusivo dell’indagine sulla condizione di Rom, Sinti e Caminanti in Italia. [Summary of the final report of the survey on the condition of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti in Italy.] Roma, Italy: Senato della Repubblica. Setényi, J. (2004, October 2–3). Élethossziglani tanulás: Az új paradigma. [Lifelong learning: The new paradigm.] In A. Monostori & B. Kósa (Eds.), Nyitott iskola: Tanuló társadalom. [Open school – Learning society.] Az Országos Közoktatási Intézet konferenciája 2003. Budapest, Hungary: Országos Közoktatási Intézet. Reteieved from https://ofi.hu/tudastar/nyitott-iskola-tanulo/elethossziglani-tanulas SOU. (2010). Romers rätt: En strategi för romer i Sverige [Roma rights: A strategy for Roma in Sweden.] (p. 55). Statens offentliga utredningar. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes. Strauß, D. (Ed.). (2011). Studie zur aktuellen Bildungssituation deutscher Sinti und Roma. [Study on the current educational situation of German Sinti and Roma.]. Retrieved from https://mediendienst-integration.de/fileadmin/Dateien/2011_Strauss_Studie_Sinti_ Bildung.pdf Surdu, M., & Friedmann, E. (2013). The Roma Education Fund: Developments and prospects for Roma inclusion. In S. Hornberg & C. Brüggemann (Eds.),s Die Bildungssituation von Sinti und Roma in Europa [The educational situation of Sinti and Roma in Europe] (pp. 35–53). Münster, Germany: Waxmann Verlag. Szoboszlai, Zs. (2006). IDEA vagy VALÓSÁG? Az élethosszig tartó tanulás a roma társadalmi csoportok körében. [IDEA or REALITY? Lifelong learning among Roma social groups.] In L. Lada (Ed.), Közvéleménykutatások az élethosszigtartó tanulásról [Opinion polls on lifelong learning] (pp. 31–52). Budapest, Hungary: Nemzeti Felnőttképzési Intézet.

14    Katalin R. Forray and Andrea Óhidy Tarnovschi, D. (2012). Roma from Romania, Bulgaria, Italy and Spain: Comparative study. Bucharest, Romania: Soros Foundation Romania. Tosi Cambini, S., & Beluschi Fabeni, G. (2017). Antiziganisms: Ethnographic engagements in Europe. In Anuac 6, 1/201799-117. Retrieved from http://ojs.uniaboutit/index. php/anuac/article/view/2927/2593 Trautsch, J. M. (2013, June 27–28). The south in postwar Europe: Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal. Internationale Tagung veranstaltet vom Deutschen Historischen Institut Rom und der Universität Basel. Tagungsbericht. Retrieved from http://dhi-roma.it/ fileadmin/user_upload/pdf-dateien/Tagungsbeichte/2013/TB_South_in_Postwar_ Europe_20130627_28.pdf

Chapter 1

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights: Roma Organisations, Policy Frameworks and European Institutions Natascha Hofmann Abstract In this chapter, Natascha Hofmann discusses the policy measures for improving the (education) situation of Roma in Europe. It concentrates on the post-war turning points and corresponding discourses before reviewing aims, outcomes and legacies of the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005–2015 proclaimed by the European Union (EU). According to Hofmann the past decades reveal a shift in the discourse of how Roma living conditions and perspectives are perceived in Europe. Reasons for that can be seen in processes referring to fields of bottom-up movements of Roma organisations, top-down approaches of the EU and its member states, shifting borders and the implementation of human rights. Outcomes of the Decade of Roma Inclusion show the importance of educational achievements, but also the importance of educational work of mentors and mediators within the communities and within the regional and national societies. Regarding the bottom-up movement of Roma organisations there seems to be a generation change not only regarding educational achievements but also by dealing with being visible as Roma and by promoting new narratives of being Roma. Keywords: Decade of Roma Inclusion; European Union; Roma Education Fund; bottom-up; top-down; human rights

Transitions of societal structures, social positions and values are intertwined with power of predominant discourses and practices (Foucault, 1981, p. 74) as well as dialectical, intergenerational learning processes and continuous refinement of

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 15–25 Copyright © 2020 by Natascha Hofmann Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191006

16    Natascha Hofmann living conditions (Berger & Luckmann, 1987, p. 201). Referring to Huffschmid discourse is not only part of ruling systems but is also a tool of the pre-rogative of interpretation with which and for what politics, media and social movements fight for (Huffschmid, 2001, p. 39). The past decades reveal a shift in the discourse of how Roma living conditions and perspectives are perceived in Europe. Reasons for that can be seen in processes referring to fields of bottom-up movements of Roma organisations, top-down approaches of the European Union (EU) and its member states, shifting borders and the implementation of human rights (Law & Kovats, 2018). This chapter will briefly outline post-war turning points and corresponding discourses before reviewing aims, outcomes and legacies of the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005–2015 proclaimed by the EU.

Roma Self-organisation and Positions of European Institutions After 1945 Before a worldwide Roma social movement arose with the first Roma World Congress 1971 as a starting point, Roma grassroots-organisations emerged in Western and Eastern Europe on national levels, for example, in France in 1950s, in the United Kingdom in 1960s, in Germany in the 1970s (Law & Kovats, 2018, p. 102ff) and Hungary in the 1950s (Guy, 2001, p. 76). Their impact on national policies remained small and limited. However, consistent political work of international, national and regional Roma organisations formed a bottom-up movement since the 1970s (Reemtsma, 1996, p. 137ff). This social movement has been able to fight for their rights and occasionally gain attention from governments. To name just one historical milestone on a national level, for instance: In 1982, the German government acknowledged the genocide on Romany and Sinti by the Nazis during the Second World War. Before that the official discourse denied ethnic reasoning behind their persecution and murder (Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma, 2017, p. 34). Comparing discourses on Roma and Roma policy in Western and Eastern European countries after 1945, policy contexts obviously differed as, for example, communist governments introduced rather assimilationist Roma policies with ‘the notion that Gypsies are a social and not an ethnic layer’ (Guy, 2001, p. 71). Discourses to talk about Roma and non-Roma, though, were ‘equally pernicious’ and familiar in eastern and western parts of the continent (Guy, 2001, p. 72). The awareness of European institutions towards a ‘transcontinental Romani diaspora’ increased with the end of the Cold War division of Europe (Kovats, 2002, p. 1). The Organization für Security and Co-operation (OSCE)1 and the Council of Europe2 in particular, who aim to restore peace, democracy and stability in

1

Organization für Secruity and Co-operation in Europe, which currently comprises 57 participating states worldwide. Retrieved from https://www.osce.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 2 The Council of Europe is the continents leading human rights organisation, founded in 1949. It includes 47 member states, 28 of which are members of the EU. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights    17 Europe and designate themselves as guardian of human rights (Seeger, 2013), focused on living conditions of Roma after 1989. It was a resolution of the Council of Europe in 1993, based on earlier European Conventions on Human Rights in 1950, which gave a significant impetus for protecting Roma and other minorities in Europe (Kovats, 2002, p. 1). The elaborated Framework Convention of the Protection of National Minorities had been signed 1995 by 22-member states and came into effect in 1998. The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC)3 was contemporaneously founded by Roma activists in Budapest, inspired by the civil rights movement in the United States and held similar aims of the organisation Voice of Roma (VoR)4 to fight for equal rights and against discrimination with their advocacy work. The Forum of European Roma Young People (FERYP),5 founded in 2002, as well as the European Roma Information Office (ERIO),6 founded in Brussels in 2003, aim at fighting for rights of Roma people, encourage active Roma participation in decision-making processes at European, national and local levels and ensure that their voices are heard by the EU and its member states. No later than the Eastern enlargement of the EU in 2004, the political voice of European Roma communities was again strengthened by the establishment of the European Roma and Travellers Forum (ERTF).7 As a non-governmental organisation (NGO) the ERTF has worked side by side with the Council of Europe since 2005. Nevertheless, the ERTF is an autonomous association which takes an active part in fighting against discrimination and for human rights by positively influencing ‘policy makers to ensure that policies reflect the real needs of the Roma community’ in Europe (European Commission, 2005). The shift of political discourse of the EU towards Roma issues became apparent at the same time and can be labelled as a turning point in inter-governmental Roma policy. By proclaiming the Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015) the EU established a policy framework aiming to improve living standards of Roma communities on national levels in Europe. This shows how shifts of borders, new responsibilities 3

ERRC was founded in the mid-1990s. Their advocacy work focusses on human right issues faced by Romani communities at a national and international level in Europe. Retrieved from http://www.errc.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 4 The VoR is a non-profit organisation, which works in different regions worldwide. Its aim is to heighten awareness of human rights issues faced by Roma and to promote and present Romani cultural and traditions. Retrieved from http://www.voiceofroma. com/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 5 FERYP is the first European Roma Youth Network established in 1997 and registered as an association in 2002 in Strasbourg, France. The Forum is connected to the Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/youth-roma. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 6 ERIO is an international organisation aiming at advocating the inclusion of Roma an improving public awareness about Roma. Retrieved from http://www.erionet.eu/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 7 The idea of the ERTF reaches back to the early 1990s as a bottom-up initiative aiming at helping Roma to express their concerns at the European level. In 2005 the ­Forum opened its secretariat in Strasbourg within the Council of Europe.

18    Natascha Hofmann and challenges influence political awareness of international institutions and officials of the EU are intertwined with bottom-up movements of self-organisations.

Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015): Aspiration and Reality The initiative to call for a Decade of Roma Inclusion traces back to the conference ‘Roma in an expanding Europe: Challenges for the Future’ in Budapest 2003. It has been launched by governments of Central and Eastern European countries, Roma activists, the World Bank,8 Open Society Institute (OSI),9 European Commission and international partners as UNDP,10 Council of Europe, OSCE, ERRC and other NGO’s. Four key sectors had been named to improve social participation and counteract discrimination and poverty, based on action plans which were supposed to be developed on national levels: (1) education – promotion of access and quality education, reduction of desegregation, teacher training; (2) employment – raising levels of qualification and skills; (3) housing – desegregation of settlements and improvement of housing standards and (4) health – improvement of health access. ‘At the beginning of the Decade there was so much effort that it felt as if a flame was burning [...]’ (Rorke, Matache, & Friedman, 2015, p. 6). This statement of Roma activist Tano Bechev from 2015 captures the existent spirit of commitment, courage and hope to make a change for Roma living standards in Europe. The development of bottom-up projects and networks from Roma self-organisations as well as of institutional top-down approaches flourished since 2005. EU-candidate countries were particularly willing and expected from the EU to put effort to develop and realise national action plans. The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)11 was established by the European Union in 2007 and for example the European Roma Policy Coalition (ERPC)12 has been constituted 8

The World Bank is an international financial institution, which supports organisations, programmes and projects with the objective to reduce poverty. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 9 The Open Society Institute is an international grant, founded by George Soros. Its objective is to support civil society groups engaged for tolerant democracies, regarding justice, independent media, education and health care. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 10 The United Nations Development Program is a global network of the United Nations, which works in about 170 countries and regions with the objective to reduce poverty, in­ equalities and exclusion. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 11 The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) is an agency of the EU helping to ensure human rights of people living in the EU are protected. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/en/about-fra. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 12 ERPC is a network of national and international NGO’s working on different aspects of discrimination against Roma people focussing objectives of the EU framework strategy on Roma Inclusion, that is, realisation of the economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights of Roma. Retrieved from http://www.errc.org/cikk. php?cikk=3796. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights    19 by a network of national and international NGOs to monitor and evaluate living conditions of Roma. In addition to this, national governments, the EU and non-governmental organisations published country reports documenting progress made (Danova, 2008; Haupert, 2007; Kullmann, Kushen, Rorke, Rövid, & Zentai, 2013; Kullmann, Kushen, Rövid, Szendrey, & Zentai, 2014). Shortly after the declaration of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, survey results from 2007 demonstrated that an extreme number of Roma live below the poverty line in South Eastern Europe (FRA, 2007; UNICEF Serbia, 2007): The percentage of Roma children not attending school is significantly high and varies from 80% (Bosnia) to 20% (Albania, Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia). The rate of unemployment was at an above-average level and varied between 44% (Romania) and 71% (Macedonia). Large numbers of Roma live in segregated areas and in conditions which fall far below minimum standards for housing, that is, without adequate access to public utilities such as water, electricity or gas. Access to health care is strongly linked to housing and disposable income. Thus, only 21–40% Roma in Bulgaria, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania and Serbia said they could afford to pay for a doctor’s visit and medicine, compared to 53–91% non-Roma. Beside of that, surveys also revealed the phenomenon that Roma groups are predominately disadvantaged and discriminated in all European countries and many of them can be considered to be at the bottom of European societies (ERPC, 2008, p. 2; FRA, 2007, p. 159ff). As already mentioned, the claim for Decade of Roma Inclusion let to framework conditions in which NGO programmes flourished, existing networks were strengthened, and new ones established. An important role can be ascribed to the Roma Education Fund (REF)13 aiming, for example, to support quality education and giving scholarships to Roma students. As education is recognised as a key issue for Roma inclusion (Miskovic 2013), various networks working courageously on international as well as national and regional basis put that on their agenda. To name just few: European Roma Grassroots Organizations Network (ERGO)14 is a network-founded bottom-up by Roma organisation directly helping local communities to make their voices heard. ERGO’s work is based on different pillars, for example, monitoring youth employment, national Roma integration strategies, community-led local development, local policy score cards; or empowerment by youth work, capacity building and connecting Roma with non-Roma and fighting prejudices through the platform Roma­React. Another international network called ternYpe has been established by youth organisations from Albania (Roma Active Albania), Bulgaria (Youth Network

13

REF is a grant-giving organisation established by the World Bank and George Soros in 2005. Its key objective is to reduce the educational achievement gap between Roma and non-Roma. Retrieved from http://www.romaeducationfund.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. 14 ERGO brings together over 25 Roma organisations from across Europe. The guiding principle of the network is that Roma themselves should take an active role to accomplish equal citizenship. Retrieved from http://ergonetwork.org/about-us/. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

20    Natascha Hofmann for Development), Germany (Amaro Drom e.V.), Hungary (Romaveritas), Italy (Roma Onlus), Macedonia (RROMA), Slovakia (Roma Education Centre), Spain (TernYkalo and Yak Bari) and Poland (Harangos) in 2010. ternYpe is a network, ‘which creates space for young people to become active citizens through empowerment, mobilisation, self-organisation and participation’.15 A consensus of these youth organisations is that they ‘believe in the common efforts by creating trust, and mutual respect between Roma and non-Roma youth’.16 Retrospective Roma activists and organisations claim there has been little progress and change for the living conditions and perspectives for Europe’s Roma and question if it had been a lost decade (Rorke et al., 2015). Tano Bechev, the Roma activist already mentioned, stated in 2015: At the beginning [...] there was so much effort [...] as if a flame was burning. Unfortunately, as each year passed by the flame grew dimmer, went down, and down. By the end of the Decade, there’s no flame, the flame went out! (Rorke et al., 2015, p. 6) Brüggemann and Friedman (2017) analysed the development of the decade and come to similar conclusions. They worked out two paradigmatic problems according to aspiration and reality of international policies aimed at Roma inclusion (p. 3). One problem refers to Roma participation. It had been a distinct aim to involve Roma civil society, national governments and organisations working side by side during the Decade of Roma Inclusion. Expectations towards Roma civil society and organisations had been high. The tasks to initiate dialogues between authorities and Roma communities on the local and national level and support implementation of monitoring the Decade Action Plans (International Steering Committee, 2005) included substantial responsibilities for a comparatively modest amount of funding. In addition, Roma activists often functioned as delegates which was questioned within Roma civil society and by government representatives, ‘who pointed to delegates’ inability to represent diverse communities in each country’ (Brüggemann & Friedman, 2017, p. 4; ISC, 2004). According to Brüggemann and Friedman, the Decade involved ‘individual Roma experts and Roma NGO representatives in international meetings, research and reporting’ rather than broad local Roma communities (Brüggemann & Friedman, 2017, p. 4). Another problem refers to the promise of accountability. The action plans and programmes were expected to be visible, measurable and evaluable (World Bank, 2003, p. 8f). National governments were supposed to formulate objectives and indicators for Roma inclusion and to evaluate concrete realisations and activities rather than measure progresses in relation to ‘national averages of Roma and non-Roma populations’ (Brüggemann & Friedman, 2017, p. 4). Moreover, it had

15

ternYpe is an international Roma youth Network founded in 2010. The network of youth and youth associations aims to create space for young people to empower themselves. Retrieved from http://ternype.eu/about-ternype. Accessed on 12, 2018. 16 See http://ternype.eu/about-ternype. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights    21 been a challenge to define adequate indicators and compare data sources which had been collected differently (Ferenc, 2008). Nevertheless, the decade should not be judged as a lost one. Reports show positive indications of an educational transition and education policy. However the change remains modest. But the difference at the end of the Decade is the broader understanding in societies ‘that segregation of Roma pupils no longer goes unquestioned, unchallenged and accepted as routine’ (Rorke et al., 2015, p. 9). What endures is the awareness of Roma issues, the important operation of the REF and the initiative to claim the Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies. This is also labelled as the decades international success and legacy (Brüggemann & Friedman, 2017, p. 5).

Roma Education Fund: Purpose and Impact The REF17 is a grant-giving organisation aiming to close the gap in educational outcomes between Roma and non-Roma, predominately in South Eastern and Central European countries. It was co-founded by the Open Society Institute and the World Bank which are the main donors of the organisation. To achieve its goal the organisation supports policies and programmes which ‘ensure quality education for Roma, including the desegregation of education systems’ in ‘all countries participating in the Decade of Roma Inclusion’ and other countries having the same target. The detailed plan of REF’s objectives include: (1) to ensure access to obligatory education by, for example, forms of parent work in education and supply of educational material; (2) to enhance the quality of education by, for example, implementing Roma language teaching and anti-bias teaching in school curriculum as well as engaging school mediators; (3) to eliminate segregated schools and classes and integrate Roma students into mainstream schools; (4) to strengthen preschool education; and (5) to support secondary, tertiary and adult education by, for example, providing scholarships and adult literacy courses. There are five currently active major programmes which were created based upon these fundamental objectives (REF): (1) Project Support Program financing public and private initiatives, projects and programmes; (2) REF Scholarship Program, the largest tertiary scholarship programme for Roma students; (3) Policy Development and Capacity Building Program assisting activities to facilitate dialogue with governments and civil society on education reform and Roma inclusion; (4) Communication and Cross Country Learning Program including activities to promote the exchange of knowledge on education reforms and Roma inclusion and (5) Reimbursable Grant Program supporting Roma NGOs and local governments in receiving EU funds for the purpose of Roma education. The achievements and impact of these programmes from 2005 to 2011 have been summarised by Surdu and Friedman (2013, p. 38f). According to their evaluated sources, the REF granted 289 projects out of 711 applications and the

17

See REF. Retrieved from http://www.romaeducationfund.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

22    Natascha Hofmann number of beneficiaries increased steadily. The number of tertiary scholarships nearly doubled from 600 in 2005 to 1,080 in 2011. The Policy Development and Capacity Building Program published several studies analysing segregation and desegregation at European, regional and national levels (Surdu & Friedman, 2013, p. 40). Those studies revealed key problems of Roma in education systems referring, for example, to limited access, equipment and teaching material in schools in segregated schools (EU Monitoring and Advocacy Program, 2007; Surdu & Friedman, 2013, p. 41f). Another key problem is discriminatory discourses and mechanisms and as Rorke sums up: there can be no progress on Roma inclusion unless direct and indirect forms of discrimination are tackled head on, unless the institutional racism that Roma face every day is fully exposed and effectively dealt with. (Rorke et al., 2015, p. 9)

National Strategy for Roma Inclusion to 2020 and Changing Narratives While the Decade of Roma Inclusion opened the way for baseline policy processes, institutional regulations and dialogue on Roma issues, the impact remains limited (Regional Cooperation Council, 2016). The reason for this is found in the isolation of Roma issues from mainstream public policies (Kovats, 2002, p. 3). Therefore, a focus of the EU-Framework for National Roma Integration Strategy is built upon regional and cross-sector coordinations. Inspired by the Decade, four key sectors including goals like the reduction of ‘the socio-economic gap between Roma and non-Roma population’ as well as reinforcing ‘specific Roma integration goals in mainstream policy’ were adopted in the Roma Integration 2020 (EU, 2011). Three levels of engagement and activities have been defined and redesigned to achieve these objectives. They refer to: (1) institutional support, for example, strengthening consultative meetings and trainings, recommending and advising policies, providing national platforms for public dialogues and workshops for capacity building; (2) regional and cross-sector cooperation for Roma issues to fit policies into the regional context and standards by, for example, high-level meetings on joint policy settings or task force meetings steering projects; and (3) EU and international cooperation, for example, mirroring the contribution to EU accession through annual reports and exchange at EU and international levels. Referring again to Rorke’s statement above, the success of efforts to improve living conditions and perspectives of Roma in Europe is linked with discriminatory discourses and institutional mechanisms. Therefore, the wide society, institutions officials and [p]olicy-makers need to take into account the complex interplay of a wide variety of factors that determine the contemporary situation [of Roma, ad by author]. In addition, for historical and

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights    23 cultural reasons, there is a profound gulf between perception and reality in respect of people about whom more is believed than is actually known. (Kovats, 2002, p. 1) Kovats’ statement emphasises the importance of the dialogues and knowledge on Roma issues. This is a basis for changing discourses and giving space for new narratives. There could be various levels for starting points, for example, to revise the presentation of Roma in schoolbooks. A REF project reviewed hundreds of textbooks and revealed misinterpretations or total absence of Roma ‘that builds stereotypes, negative social discourse, and separation between groups’ (REF). Knowing that changing narratives takes time, the REF already developed a Strategy Framework 2021–2030 (REF Strategy Framework, 2021–2030). To sum up referring to Beckett: ‘Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better’ (Beckett, 1983). I agree that failure is generally a learning experience, get lessons learned and try again. Lessons learned through the Decade should be used now in the Roma Integration 2020. To achieve visible progress, systematic cross-sector regional coordination and possibilities to overcome bureaucratic obstacles with creative solutions could be helpful. The aim should be not to fail better, but also to put the goals of the Roma Integration 2020 into effect.

Conclusion A look at societal and political development in Europe reveals that discourses on Roma issues were influenced by reciprocal dynamics of claims, actions and reactions of grassroots organisations and governmental institutions and frameworks. Political aims converged during the Decade of Roma Inclusion: comply with human rights, create frameworks and spaces for equal social participation as well as for taking responsibility. Enhancements in educational achievements of Roma are recognised. Nevertheless, predominately for many Roma the crux of school access, transitions from school to the world of employment, access to housing and to health care remain. Discrimination and mechanisms of exclusion underlie these key problems. Outcomes of the Decade of Roma Inclusion reveal the importance of educational achievements, but also the importance of educational work of mentors and mediators within the communities and within the regional and national societies. Regarding the bottom-up movement of Roma organisations there seems to be a generation change not only regarding educational achievements, but also by dealing with being visible as Roma and by promoting new narratives of being Roma. These need courage and confidence and should earn respect, especially in times of the strengthening of right-wing movements and politics within Europe.

References Beckett, S. (1983). Worstward Ho. New York, NY: Grove Press. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1987). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. [The Social Construction of Reality.] Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer.

24    Natascha Hofmann Brüggemann, C., & Friedman, E. (2017). The Decade of Roma Inclusion: Origins, actors, and legacies. European Education, 49(1), 1–9. Danova, S. (Ed.). (2008). Decade watch: Roma activists assess the progress of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2007 update. Budapest, Hungary: Createch Ltd. EU Roma Policy Coalition (ERPC) (Ed.). (2008). Towards a European policy on Roma inclusion. Brussels, Belgium: ERPC. European Commission. (2005). Lifelong learning program. The European Roma and Travellers Forum (Strasbourg-FR). 11/0029-G/1083. Retrieved from http:// www.scdc.org.uk/media/resources/Grundtvigcasestudies/The%20European%20 Roma%20and%20Travellers%20Forum%20(Strasbourg%20FR).pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Roma Grassroots Organisations Network (ERGO). Retrieved from http:// ergonetwork.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC). Retrieved from http://www.errc.org/who-we-are/ our-story. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). (2007). Report on racism and xenophobia in the Member States of the EU. Vienna, Austria: FRA. Europäische Union (EU). (2011). EU-Rahmen für nationale Strategien zur Integration der Roma bis 2020. Brüssel. Retrieved from https://osteuropa.lpb-bw.de/fileadmin/ osteuropa/pdf/EU_Romastrategie.pdf Ferenc, Z. (2008). Indicator Working Group Report prepared by Martin Kahanec & the Indicator Group. Retrieved from http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/9330_ file7_indicator-working-group-report.pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Forum of European Roma Young People (FERYP). Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/ en/web/youth-roma/about-the-project Foucault, M. (1981). Archäologie des Wissens. Frankfurt am Main, p. 74 Guy, W. (Ed.). (2001). Between past and future. The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe. Hatfield: University Hertfordshire Press. Haupert, A. (Ed.). (2007). Decade watch: Roma activists assess the progress of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2005–2006. Budapest: Createch Ltd. Huffschmid, A. (2001, August). Wider-Sprechen. Zur zapatstschen Selbstbehauptung. KultuRRevoluton Nr. 41/42 pp. 39–49. International Steering Committee. (2004). Second meeting of the Roma Decade Steering Committee: Minutes and summary. Budapest, Hungary: International Steering Committee. International Steering Committee. (2005). Decade of Roma inclusion 2005–2015: Terms of reference, Bucharest, Romania: International Steering Committee. Kovats, M. (2002). The European Roma question. Briefing Paper New Series No. 31. The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London. Kullmann, A., Kushen, R., Rorke, B., Rövid, M., & Zentai, V. (2013). Civil Society monitoring on the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies and Decade Action Plans in 2012: Summary report. Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Kullmann, A., Kushen, R., Rövid, M., Szendrey, O., & Zentai, V. (2014). Civil Society monitoring on the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies and Decade Action Plans in 2012 and 2013: Summary report. Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Law, I., & Kovats, M. (2018). Rethinking Roma. Identities, politicisation and new agendas (Mapping Global Racism). Berlin: Springer. Miskovic, M. (Ed.). (2013). Roma education in Europe. Practises, policies and politics. London: Routledge. Open Society Institute, EU Monitoring and Advocacy Program, Education Support Program. (2007). Equal access to quality education for Roma (Vols. 1 and 2). Budapest: Roma Participation Program.

Bottom Up, Top Down and Human Rights    25 Reemtsma, K. (1996). Sinti und Roma. Geschichte, Kultur, Gegenwart. [Sinti and Romani People. History, Culture, Present.] München, Germany: Beck. REF Strategy Framework. (2021–2030). Retrieved from https://www.romaeducationfund. org/sites/default/files/documents/ref_strategicframework2030.pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Regional Cooperation Council. (2016). Roma Integration 2020. Retrieved from https:// www.rcc.int/romaintegration2020/docs/29/roma-integration-2020-brochure. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Roma Education Fund (REF). Over 200 textbooks reviewed by REF Junior researchers. Retrieved from http://www.romaeducationfund.org/news/ref/news-and-events/over200-textbooks-reviewed-ref-junior-researchers. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Rorke, B., Matache, M., & Friedman, E. (2015). A lost decade? Reflections on Roma Inclusion (2005–2015). Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Seeger, S. (2013). Der Europarat. In M. Große & H.-G. Hüttmann (Eds.), Das Europalexikon, [Council of Europe, in: Encyclopaedia of Europe] 2., aktual. Aufl. Bonn, Germany: Dietz. Retrieved from http://www.bpb.de/nach-schlagen/lexika/ das-europalexikon/176949/europarat. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Surdu, M. (2002). Quality of education in schools with a high percentage of Roma pupils. Budapest, Hungary: Open Society Institute Budapest. Surdu, M., & Friedman, E. (2013). The Roma Education fund. In S. Hornberg & C. Brüggemann (Eds.), The Educational Situation of Sinti and Romani people in Europe. (pp. 35–51). Münster, Germany: Waxmann Verlag. ternYpe – International Roma Youth Network. Retrieved from http://www.ternype.eu/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. UNICEF (Ed.). (2007). Breaking the cycle of exclusion: Roma children in South East Europe, Serbien. Voice of Roma (VoR). Retrieved from http://www.voiceofroma.com/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. World Bank. (2003). Briefing note. Conference: “Roma in an expanding Europe: Challenges for the future.” Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/872391468749375351/Roma-in-an-expanding-Europe-Challenges-for-the-future. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma (Ed.). (2017). 45 Jahre Bürgerrechtsarbeit deutscher Sinti und Roma/45 years of civil rights work of German Sinti and Roma. Heidelberg, Germany: Neumann Druck.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 2

Dawn of Learning! Sinti and Roma in Germany Natascha Hofmann Abstract In this chapter, the author analyses the education situation of Sinti and Roma in Germany and calls for a ‘Dawn of Learning!’ The author asks: Who is learning (from whom and for whom)? What is learned? What has to be learned? To answer these questions firstly the author describes the social and legal situation of the Roma minority in Germany then analyses their attainment in the German education system. With the help of two studies (Hundsalz, 1982; Strauss, 2011) the author demonstrates that educational attainments of German Sinti and Roma had significantly increased over time. Then the author emphasises the importance of mentoring programmes – involving Sinti and Roma as educational mentors – especially for their important role in the integration process. Lastly, the author shows the results of her own study aimed at revealing correlations of education and integration opportunities of Roma youth, with or without a limited residence permit in Germany (Hofmann, 2011). The question: What has been learned – so far? The author answers as followed: A dawn of learning for mutual respect and appreciation can be seen. The question: What has to be learned? The author’s answer: she wishes for a common aim of our learning processes to be a conscious and respectful handling of diversity which allows differences but focuses on common ground as a starting point for social negotiation to shape the society in which we want to live – on regional, national and ­European grounds. Keywords: Germany; education; dawn of learning; German Sinti and Roma; mentoring programmes; social and legal situation

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 27–44 Copyright © 2020 by Natascha Hofmann Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191007

28    Natascha Hofmann To understand the living and education conditions of Sinti and Roma in Germany it is inevitable to look into German history as well as national and EU policies according to minority rights and migration treaties. The central theme that shaped lives of different Roma groups in general is discrimination due to antiziganism (End et al., 2009). Mechanisms of antiziganism, respectively antiRomani sentiments and patterns, draw a continuous line in history from social marginalisation in medieval times, over attempts of assimilation in the eighteenth century, to establishment of surveillance authorities in the German Empire and the Weimar Republic. Back then so-called ‘Zigeuner-Nachrichtenstellen’ (Gypsy-Intelligence Agency) collected data to control people who were labelled as ‘Zigeuner’ (Gypsy) (Embring-Romang, 2002, p. 77). The climax of antiziganist patterns is manifested in Nazi Germany when about 500,000 European Roma were persecuted and murdered. Sinti and Roma children had been excluded from school teaching – some even had been arrested in school and directly deported into internment camps (Adler, 1995, p. 77). Nazi Germany can not only be found guilty for the death of numerous Sinti and Roma, but furthermore for a high illiteracy rate under survivors as well as for rejective sentiments of Sinti and Roma towards school institutions after World War II. The continuity of structural discrimination against Sinti and Roma after 1945 is striking. While the Holocaust had been officially recognised as a genocide of Jews (Shoah) and other groups, the murder of Roma people was not: According to a court decision in 1956, Sinti and Roma had been mainly persecuted in Nazi Germany due to ‘imputed antisocial behaviour’ (BGH, 07.01.1956; s. Zülch 1979, 168). The first World Romani Congress in 1971 was an international organisation of Roma people with many goals including: improving civil rights and education while also achieving international recognition of the murder of the Romani people in WW II as a genocide and the associated right to receive reparations. A Roma civil rights movement arose in Germany contemporaneously and in 1982 nine unions of this political movement led to the foundation of the Central Council of German Sinti and Roma, headed by the elected chairperson Romani Rose (Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma, 2017, p. 17). In the same year Chancellor Helmut Schmidt officially recognised the genocide of Sinti and Roma (Porajmos) in Nazi Germany and declared: ‘The Nazi dictatorship inflicted a grave injustice on the Sinti and Roma. They were persecuted for reasons of race. These crimes constituted an act of genocide’ (Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma, 2017, p. 34). In 2012, 30 years later, the Memorial to the Sinti and Roma of Europe Murdered under the National Socialist Regime was inaugurated in Berlin. Relating to the title of this book ‘Lifelong Learning for Roma’ and regarding the selected historical events above, I dare to ask: Who is learning (from whom and for whom)? What is learned? What has to be learned?

The Roma Minority in Germany Sinti and Roma have been recognised in Germany as one out of four national minorities since the European Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities was signed in 1995 and ratified in 1998 by several European Countries

Dawn of Learning!    29 (Bundesministerium des Inneren, 2014, p. 36). The concrete implementation of regulations from the EU’s multilateral treaty shall be administered by each member country respectively, in Germany by each federal state. German states have their own political structures, leading to many variations of the administration of the treaty: Whereas for example, Sinti and Roma, Danish and Friesian are equally defined in Schleswig-Holstein’s federal constitution, the first treaty in Germany had been signed between the federal governance of Baden-Württemberg and the federal Sinti and Roma organisation in 2013 (Embring-Romang, 2014).

About Statistics and Legal Status of Sinti and Roma in Germany Talking about Sinti and Roma living in Germany today needs a differentiating view on heterogeneous groups due to origin and periods of migration, legal and social status, culture/s and language/s (Óhidy & Hofmann, 2016, p. 50). Most of them live in regions of Rhein-Ruhr, Rhein-Main or Rhein-Neckar as well as in cities like ­Berlin, Hamburg or Kiel and their urban catchment (Bundesministerium des Inneren, 2011). According to Roma organisations about 70,000 to 150,000 Sinti and Roma live in Germany (Engbring-Romang, 2014). The Berlin-Institute of Population and Development estimates that 70,000 Sinti and Roma are German citizens and 50,000 have applied for asylum as of 2010 (Brüggemann et al., 2013, p. 97; Jonuz, 2009). The large discrepancies between estimates are a result of a lack of official statistics considering ethnic categories in Germany – an effect of abolishing statistical practices of Nazi Germany. According to historical documents, the Sinti and Roma people can be traced back in Germany’s history through reports on the people, language analysis migration periods, and routes of Romani travel. The earliest document hinting at Sinti and Roma being in German-speaking areas dates back to 1407 in Hildesheim. Some historical sources refer to a friendly welcoming of so-called ‘Zigeuner’ – pilgrims on account of medieval values of hospitality or to royal and pontifical letters of consignment which attested to their unique and legal status (Rombase handbook, p. 15). Though these documents verify that Roma people had been well received, they are rare to find in archives. Most historical documents illustrate an attributed criminality towards ‘Zigeuner’ – a still existing antiziganistic image. Scientists trace the accusation of thievery back to the fragile social order in the Late Middle Ages causing a reaction of projecting social fears against the people called ‘Zigeuner’ (Reemtsma, 1996, p. 30). Sinti are the first Roma group who had been migrating about 600 years ago to Western Europe and presumably originate from a region called Sindh, which belongs to Pakistan today (Matras, 2003, p. 233). Ancestors of those migrants live in regions which belong now to Germany, Belgium, North Italy and France – where they define themselves as Manouches. Sinti living in Germany belong to the recognised national, autochthon minority and are German citizens. Popular family names are for example, Reinhardt, Rose, Rosenberg, Spindler, Weiss, Winterstein – some among them are known as famous musicians, like jazz ­ ­musician Titi Winterstein, or as civil right activists, like Romani Rose.

30    Natascha Hofmann Other migration periods ranged from the fourteenth to fifteenth century when Vlach from Transylvania (Rumania) emigrated or eighteenth to nineteenth century when Lovara from Poland did the same (Margalit & Matras, 2007, p. 106). During the 1960–1970s Roma migrated as ‘guest workers’ from former Yugoslavia and often revealed their national rather than their ethnic identity due to fear of discrimination (Jonuz, 2009, p. 11). The collapse of the Iron Curtain, the Romanian Revolution as well as the breakup of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s led to numerous groups of refugees from Romania, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo heading for Germany and applying for asylum (Matter, 2015, p. 74f; Mihok, 2001). Some of those former refugees now possess an unlimited residence permit or became German citizens (Hofmann, 2011). Most of them moved to Berlin, Bochum, Dortmund, Duisburg, Hamm, Herne, Hagen and Köln (Bundesministerium des Inneren, 2011). Other refugees left voluntarily or were forcibly removed on the basis of return policies and treaties with their country of origin. Since the enlargement of the European Union (2004–2007) Roma – especially from the new member states Romania and Bulgaria – are migrating to Germany. The Schengen agreement enables them to live in Germany with the status of being EU citizens (Brüggemann et al., 2013, p. 97; Matter, 2015, p. 136f).

Social Situation and the Sustained Influence of Antiziganism There are little representative studies about the social situation of Sinti and Roma in Germany. It is necessary to refer to multiple sources and surveys in order to depict their social and daily living conditions, but first of all it is necessary to ask critically: Which discourses about Roma people are dominant in German political, social or scientific landscapes? What, according to these discourses, is visible, what is invisible and why? As described at the beginning of this article, it took about 40 years until the genocide of Sinti and Roma was officially recognised. Those who survived Nazi Germany were again marginalised and resettled on boundary areas of cities – segregated and often with insufficient or no public electricity or water supply (Widmann, 2001). In the 1960s a communal integrating concept had been implemented in the city of Freiburg i. Br. and had been discussed as a role model in Germany: A new urban district in the city of Freiburg had been built up with the idea to establish housing space and a community house for Sinti, where on one hand extended families could organise and arrange their lives together and on the other hand social workers could support on location (Widmann, 2001). The Freiburg housing model might have been regarded as a progressive concept in the 1960s, but it has to be criticised from a contemporary scientific and political perspective (Dobeneck, 2006) and it doesn’t live up to the prevailing concept of inclusion (Booth, 2003). Successful inclusion processes – in schools or communes – would imply an attitude of appreciation and recognition of diversity and at once a reduction of exclusion. Appreciative attitudes towards Sinti and Roma are, according to different surveys, rare. Surveys of the Emnid-Institut in the 1960s and 1990s (Mihok & Widmann, 2005, p. 56) and of the German Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes

Dawn of Learning!    31 (Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency/ADS, 2014) reveal that Sinti and Roma are labelled as the most unpopular inhabitants of Germany. Every third of the interviewed persons admit to not wanting to live next door to Roma people. A combination of ‘neglect, ignorance and rejection’ contribute to discriminating and antiziganistic patterns in Germany summarised Christine Lüders the ADSsurvey (ADS-survey, 2014). In comparison to other European countries, it can be seen that these negative sentiments and disadvantages exist similarly in other societies: A report of the EU Agency for fundamental rights in 2007 shows that Roma people are disproportionately affected by discrimination in schools, the work place, and access to housing and health care in all EU member countries (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2007, p. 159f). Roma people with a limited residence permit and no regular job suffer from intersectional social discrimination (Baumert et al., 2006). To facilitate social mobility and participation and to prevent institutional discrimination in Germany, Roma often do not reveal their ethnic affiliation – even though it might be important to their own identity (Jonuz, 2009, p. 290; Strauss, 2011). This strengthens the effect that Roma with successful biographies – if successful means integration in, for example, work market or high level of education – might stay invisible in public. Instead, the focus lies on visible poor Roma people, which is used for political and excluding discourses (Matter, 2015, p. 267). Furthermore, effects of social disadvantages are rashly labelled culture as a marker of difference (Kaschuba, 1995, p. 17).

Self-Designations, Culture and Language/s The sociologist Jean-Pierre Liègeois once described Roma people as a mosaic of different sub-groups belonging together (Liégeois, 1999, p. 53). Roma organisations and activists also argument for using Roma as a subordinate name. This gives the Roma people a stronger political mouthpiece to speak up for minority rights. From a Romani or cultural anthropologist view, the name Roma might be inadequate and doesn’t mirror existing differences according to language, religious faith, cultural traditions, regional origin and social status. Romani people usually refer to their own self-designations like Sinti, Manouche, Roma, Lovara, Ashkali, Arlije, Kalé – to name only some. In Germany the officially used term is Sinti and Roma also referring to selfdesignations. The long-lasting discussion about the naming of the victims of Porajmos on the memorial plaque of the Memorial to the Sinti and Roma of Europe Murdered under the National Socialist Regime provides an insight to the self-designation and political correctness of naming people who had been persecuted as so-called ‘Zigeuner’: Whereas Romani Rose, leader of the Central Council of German Sinti and Roma, denies ‘Zigeuner’ as self-designation because national socialists had used this name as a negative label, the Sinti Allianz and the German Federal Government proposed to use this term as a historical word at the beginning of the discussion. The ADS-survey from 2014 has not only demonstrated that the term ‘Gypsy’ has to be changed, but also antiziganistic attitudes towards Roma people.

32    Natascha Hofmann Culture is defined here as a continuous process of altering structures, meaning and actions in daily life in accordance with external, economic and social conditions (Bausinger, 1986, p. 147; Berger & Luckmann, 1987; Hannerz, 1996). From this perspective, it is understandable that the habits, religious rituals and language/s of Roma people have been influenced by each society they passed on their migrations over the last centuries (Heinschink & Cech, 2013, p. 53). Therefore, for example, Roma or Ashkali from Kosovo refer to Muslim faith and rituals whereas Roma people from Romania often refer to Christian faith – evangelical free church (Ries, 2011, p. 83). German Sinti and Roma often belong to evangelical free churches and have meetings during summers (Dobeneck, 2006). Mobility is often attributed to Roma culture. According to Sinti and Roma in Germany it has to be pointed out that in the nineteenth century a mobile lifestyle had been part of working life for many Sinti. Today the majority of German Sinti and Roma live permanently in the same place for generations. Few families travel on a short-term basis due to business, meeting family members or religious communities (Strauss, 2011, p. 41). Circular mobility is characteristic for a small group, which allows them to cultivate and use transnational networks (Hornberg, 2010, pp. 63–70). This might be more important for Roma originating from other countries. What Sinti and Roma often have in common is experienced discrimination (Lindemann, 2005), but also multilingual fluency (Bundesministerium des Inneren, 2014, p. 39). Most of German Sinti and Roma learn – beside German – a variation of Roma language that is spoken within the communities: Sinti learn regional variations of Roma Čhib, Vlach a Vlach dialect and Lovara a Lovari dialect of Roma language (Bundesministerium des Inneren, 2014; Margalit & Matras, 2007; Matras, 2003). Roma people who immigrated after 1990s additionally often speak the language of their countries of origin. Their fluency of ­German, which is functioning as the official language for education, differs a lot. An insufficient linguistic ability in German is one of the major factors contributing to failures in school (Gogolin & Lange, 2011, p. 110).

Sinti and Roma in the Education System in Germany It is an incontrovertible fact that education and learning processes contribute to societal participation and mobility. Social scientists emphasise that a lack of education reproduces social inequality and economically disadvantaged people are likely to be more affected by this mechanism (Bourdieu, 1971; Lauterbach et al., 2003, p. 160; Munoz, 2006, p. 3). Sinti and Roma – regardless if they belong to the German national minority or to a migrant group – are particularly affected by educational disadvantages (Hundsalz, 1982; Strauss, 2011; Rolly, 2012). Empirical research which focusses on factors which positively influence educational biographies could be useful for political decision-makers (Hofmann, 2011; Scherr & Sachs, 2017). Striking is that the history of Sinti and Roma – especially the period of persecution and murder under the National Socialist Regime – still only plays a small role in school curriculum and school books (Brüggemann et al., 2013, p. 109; Stachwitz, 2006, p. 163). According to a recent survey of the Documentation Center of German Sinti and Roma one third of the interviewed teachers

Dawn of Learning!    33 reported that they give lessons on topics referring to ‘Sinti and Roma’ (Mengersen, 2012, p. 7). Nevertheless, a majority of those teachers would themselves like to become more informed on Roma history (Mengersen, 2012, p. 11).

Educational Attainment of the Sinti and Roma in German Education System Two studies provide indications about the educational achievements of Sinti and Roma living in Germany: Andreas Hundsalz interviewed 132 Sinti and conducted a written inquiry of social welfare offices (Hundsalz, 1982). A more recent research study had been coordinated by Daniel Strauss and was published in 2011 (Strauss, 2011). It is the first study in Germany involving Sinti and Roma themselves in the position of coordinators and skilled researchers. This is an important milestone in scientific explorations as before Roma people had only been objects of studies and collected data which often had been used to marginalise and persecute them. Spivak describes this as the process of the marginalised the subaltern joining in the discussion to speak (Spivak, 2007) (Table 2.1). A comparison of both studies demonstrates that educational attainments of German Sinti and Roma had significantly increased over time (Brüggemann et al., 2013, p. 104f): In 1982, 34% of the Sinti and Roma interviewed by Hundsalz reported not having attended school, while only 13% in Strauss’s 2011 study reported the same. Also the percentage of Sinti and Roma who achieved secondary school graduation increased from 20% to 47% (Hundsalz, 1982, p. 70; Strauss, 2011, p. 32). Meanwhile, less Sinti and Roma attend special schools for children with learning difficulties, where they are often registered due to antiziganistic patterns. The percentage decreased from 31% to 9.4% from 1982 to 2011 (Hundsalz, Table 2.1:  Educational Achievements of Sinti and Roma in Germany 1982–2011. Type of School/Graduation

Study Results (Hundsalz, 1982)

Study Results (Strauss, 2011)

Age of Interviewee: 16+

Age of Interviewee: 14+

Attendance of regular school

69%

90.6%

Attendance of special school

31%

9.4%

No school attendance

34%

13%

No school graduation (yet)

46%

44%

Secondary school graduation

20%

47%

Finished apprenticeship

 6%

18.8%*

No apprenticeship

94%

69%*

*No response: 12.2 % Source: Calculations of Óhidy in Hofmann/Óhidy (2018) based on Brüggemann, Hornberg, & Jonuz, 2013, pp. 104–105.

34    Natascha Hofmann 1982; Strauss, 2011, p. 32). Disadvantages in educational achievements do, however, seem to remain for Sinti and Roma in comparison to the German federal averages (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2011). Qualitative social science research reveals positive conditions for educational careers and confirm Sinti and Roma being enroled in German universities (Jonuz, 2009; Scherr & Sachs, 2017). International comparative researches on living and educational conditions of Roma in South East Europe as well as of Roma migrants living in Germany point out that they are affected by multiple disadvantages (Schlaginweit & Rupprecht, 2007; UNICEF Serbien, 2007). Roma living in South-Eastern European countries disproportionately face the following problems: housing and access to water and electricity is not always available, a lack of well-developed infrastructure complicate access to schools and health care centers, employers reluctantly hire Roma people due to prejudices or insufficient educational attainment. As mentioned earlier – Roma who emigrated from former Yugoslavia to Germany might have to live with a limited residence permit. That means not knowing if and when they could be sent back, not having a chance to build up a future – neither in Germany nor in their country of origin, having no or difficult access to schooling and labour market (Schroeder, 2003, pp. 379–398). To sum up: Educational paths of Sinti and Roma living in Germany apparently differ according to experiences with (institutional) discrimination and according to social, educational and migrant backgrounds – which is related to jurisdictional settings and might limit societal participation.

Policies and Support Programmes for Roma Education – Call for a Dawn of Learning! Initiatives to counteract the educational disadvantage of children with a Sinti or Roma background have existed for several decades (Krause, 1989; Lindemann, 2005). The political objective of the European Union to improve living conditions of Roma people had been set by proclaiming the Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015) and by calling to develop and implement national integration strategies up to 2020 (Europäische Union, 2011). In Germany, a working committee had been founded by Sinti and Roma associations, political representatives and other experts to work out guidelines and aims for different sectors (EVZ, 2016): (1) It is imperative to implement participative processes according to monitoring and evaluating educational results and projects, that is, Sinti and Roma have to be involved in professional monitoring teams. (2) Furthermore Sinti and Roma should be encouraged and supported to qualify for and work in different professions in the field of education, that is, on one hand those who already work in kindergartens or schools should easily have access to professional training, on the other hand Sinti and Roma should be involved in educational professions with a long-term strategy for permanent inclusion. This might allow them to function as role models. (3) More Sinti and Roma should be trained and employed in already existing mentoring programmes. In addition, detailed information about sponsorship offers and funded scholarships should be provided for Sinti and Roma. (4) A change in educational framework conditions includes on one hand an

Dawn of Learning!    35 improvement of educational results and societal participation of Sinti and Roma, on the other hand a critical reflection on antiziganistic patterns in our society. That means knowledge transfer about living conditions of Roma people in history and today should be part of school lessons, teacher training and political adult education. Well-conceptualised and prepared working material with exercises already exist (Alte Feuerwehrwache, 2014). To sum up – the call for a dawn of learning refers to a general change on structural, institutional and individual levels which forms the basis of reciprocal learning processes of Roma people and other people living in our society. Due to the success of already existing mentoring programmes, I want to draw particular attention to the educational sector here. Four mentoring programmes can be named as best practice examples as they also include two similar qualifying schedules, are implemented differently in the federal states of Germany and work in Hamburg, Berlin, Mannheim and Munich. The beginning of the mentoring or educational advisor programme in Hamburg dates back to the 1980s. At that time a majority of children with Sinti and Roma background in Hamburg did not go to school at all, the rate of those who attended special need schools was disproportionately high and only few graduated (Krause, 1989). Aiming at supporting children to attend school regularly and absolve a graduation, a teacher with Roma background had been engaged in a primary school in 1993. A specific action plan was developed by educational scientist Mareile Krause and the Cinti Union Hamburg to employ further Roma teachers. The working field of Sinti and Roma as educational advisors refer to needs of scholars, parents and teachers. That means they took also differing needs of Sinti having the status of a recognised national minority as well as of Roma migrants having various social status and speaking in diverse levels of German language. In 2011, Krause and the Cinti Union, with the support of the state of Hamburg, developed a modular training programme to improve the professional work of education advisors. The schedule covered psychological, educational, juridical and linguistic topics as well as thematic fields on school organisation, teaching, professionalisation and history of Sinti and Roma. Of the 15 Sinti und Roma who attended the training, 14 graduated and nine had been employed in the education sector by the state of Hamburg. An evaluation of the work of educational advisors in Hamburg had been carried out in 2013 and 2014 (Kressel, 2015). An essential conclusion of the evaluation was that trusting relationships between pupils, parents and teachers had been established or strengthened and led to good communication. Therefore parents have a better insight into schooling processes and no longer project their fears onto their children in ‘stange hands’ which results in decreasing numbers of school absences. Positive aspects leading to successful work of educational advisors seem to relate to both motivation and competences, as well as appreciation by school leadership and colleagues and involvement in school meetings (Kressel, 2015, p. 25f). Mentoring programmes – involving Sinti and Roma as educational mentors – have also existed for many years in Berlin, Mannheim and Munich. After the earlier mentioned study by Daniel Strauss (Strauss, 2011), the three i­nstitutions RAA ­Berlin, Romnokher in Mannheim and Madhouse in Munich developed

36    Natascha Hofmann a professional training which follows the ROMED model – a European training ­programme for Sinti and Roma mediators. The major aim had been to expand and realise equal access to schooling and the labour market (RAA, 2014, p. 7). The modular schedule refers to similar areas of expertises and includes a large portion of practical experience. Remarkable is the definite attitude towards inclusion and heterogeneous learning groups: Sinti and Roma work as educational mentors focussing explicitly – but not exclusively – on scholars with Sinti or Roma background (RAA, 2014, p. 27). This counteracts a lable of an ‘ethnic profession’ as those mentors assist all educational disadvantaged scholars. Alike to the evaluation of the educational advisor model in Hamburg, good communication and cooperation as well as motivation and competences are named to have positive effects on the success of the mentoring programme (RAA, 2014, p. 44). A distinct difference from Hamburgs model is its systematic implementation in governmental institutions, whereas mentoring programmes in Berlin, Mannheim and Munich are administered by organisations rather than by state-owned institutions. That is because education is subject to federal state governments and structural implementation of educational programmes underlies political will.

Successful Practical Examples from the Perspective of Roma in Germany Thinking of the question raised, who is learning (from whom and for whom)? mentoring programmes – as described above – might give a possible answer. Mentoring programmes create conditions for enriching encounters which generate stimuli for reciprocal, social and individual learning processes. Mentoring programmes are generally in great demand in Germany, especially for their important role in the integration process. The importance of mentors is what I – among other things – worked out in a qualitative research study in 2006–2007. The study aimed at revealing correlations of education and integration opportunities of Roma youth, with or without a limited residence permit in Germany (Hofmann, 2011). Sixteen narrative, half-structured interviews were given by predominantly male and few female Roma aged 14–25 years. The duration of the interviews differed from 10 to 90 minutes. To complement and contrast perspectives and statements of the interviewed Roma, 17 guideline-based interviews were undertaken with teachers and social workers. All interviews were recorded, and interview transcripts were written. The transcribed interviews were analysed with the theoretical coding model after Glaser, Strauss and Corbin (Strauss, 1991, p. 90f) and the case-by-case analysis (Mayring, 2002, p. 41f). Participatory observation through engagement in a youth organisation and procedural documentation complemented the spectrum of methods. Results of the research study had been categorised in the following thematic areas: impact of being a refugee in daily life and education sector, projection of Roma prejudices, socio-cultural distinction among different Roma groups, social distinction towards Germans and Roma with so-called ‘German attitudes’ and the importance of mentors and role models.

Dawn of Learning!    37 Five out of 16 interviewed Roma report that the relationship to a mentor influenced their course of education as well as their personal development in an encouraging and positive way: Mentors were role models, gave valuable advices to orientate in the school system, encouraged to start an apprenticeship or training after school or established contact to future employers (Hofmann, 2011, p. 114). The difference to the mentioned mentoring programmes is that all mentor–mentee relationships developed independently by individual face-to-face interactions in daily life, apart from existing programmes. The self-chosen mentors were mostly German and worked as teachers, social workers or employers with the young Roma aged from 14 to 24 years. A central motif seems to be also the mentor’s attitudes of having an honest interest in the lives of their self-chosen mentees – and vice versa. This allowed an authentic exchange in the mentor– mentee relationship which marks societal integration processes on an individual level and provides opportunities to access further societal sectors through the existing networks of the mentor (Stichweh, 2005, p. 52). Basically, two directive components can be differentiated thinking of mentor–mentee relationships: if mentors are self-chosen or embedded in a programme, and if mentors originate from the community or the major society. Two examples will briefly exemplify the importance of self-chosen mentors for a positive influence on courses of education: Bilsena,1 one of the female respondents, says with a smile: ‘Some admired stars, for me Mrs K. had been a role model …’ (Hofmann & Óhidy, 2018). Mrs K. had been a social worker in a residential establishment for refugees where Bilsena and her family lived. In the 1990s she emigrated from Mazedonia to Germany. According to socio-economic circumstances, her family might belong to the middle class. Education is greatly valued in her family, nevertheless young married women usually do not pursue a career. Due to intrinsic motivation, Bilsena quickly learned the German language, graduated secondary school and absolved a job training in health sector. Today she also uses her multilingualism for professional translation work. Looking back, Bilsena says that Mrs K. always encouraged her to find her own way, also being a role model to balance work, family and personal life. She also gave her practical advice which helped to facilitate her access to education. Neno,2 a male respondent, mentions that Mr B. played a crucial role in his educational pathway: ‘Mr B. is an enormous support and is a kind of mentor to me who accompanies me for six years already’ (Hofmann & Óhidy, 2018). In contrast to Bilsena, Neno did not meet his self-chosen mentor until a month after arriving to his new home. Before Neno got to know Mr B., he had to cope with experiences of discrimination. He could not find friends among his schoolmates and finally had been sent to a special school for reasons he did not understand. Other teachers stated later that Neno’s abilities had not been seen and adequately supported in the school for pupils with special needs. Retrospectively this period

1

All names have been changed. All names have been changed.

2

38    Natascha Hofmann of schooling provokes sadness and anger in Neno. What Neno experienced is the mechanism of institutional discrimination (Gomolla & Radtke, 2002). When social worker Mr B. and Neno got to know each other, Mr B. helped Neno to identify his interests and competences and encouraged him to visit a graduate secondary school. Meanwhile, Neno has graduated high school and currently works in media design sector. Mr B. has remained a trustful friend who still ­supports Neno. Beside the importance of mentors, another essential factor for educational ­pathways could be worked out in the research study. If schools and training institutions were ‘tasty’ (‘schmecken’) (Lindemann, 2005), where social and ­cultural differences are acknowledged but not focussed on, where ­antiziganistic patterns are reflected upon and strategies are developed to face them (Alte ­Feuerwehrwache e.V., 2014; Bezirksregierung Arnsberg, 2011, p. 66f   ) – this might contribute to encounter on an equal footing of Romani people and non-Roma (gadje) (­ Hofmann, 2011). What has been learned – so far? It has been a long-lasting struggle and learning process until Sinti and Roma were recognised as a national minority in Germany. Mentoring programmes, scholarships and sponsorships have been established due to enhance access to education, societal participation and mobility. A dawn of learning for mutual respect and appreciation can be seen. Nevertheless, inequities and disadvantages still exist and antiziganistic patterns are widely spread. What has to be learned? It might be idealistic, but I wish for a common aim of our learning processes to be a conscious and respectful handling of diversity which allows for differences but focusses on common ground. This would be a starting point for social negotiation to shape the society in which we want to live – on regional, national and European grounds.

References Adler, H. R. (1995). Von der Dieselstraße nach Auschwitz – ein Frankfurter Sinto berichtet, in: Bromberger, Barbara, Jutta Freyberg, Hans von Mausbach (Hrsg.): “Wir h ­ atten andere Träume.” Kinder und Jugendliche unter der NS-Diktatur. Studienkreis Deutscher Widerstand. Frankfurt a.M.: VAS, S. 76–77. Alte Feuerwache e.V. - Jugendbildungsstätte Kaubstraße. (2014). Methodenhandbuch zum Thema Antiziganismus. Für die schulische und außerschulische Bildungsarbeit. [Methodoloical Manual focusing on Antiziganism. For Formal and Non-formal Educational Work.] Münster: Unrast Verlag. 2., überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Antidiskriminierungsstelle des Bundes (ADS ed.) (2014). Zwischen Gleichgültigkeit und Ablehnung. Bevölkerungseinstellungen gegenüber Sinti und Roma. [Federal AntiDiscrimination Agency: Between indifference and rejection. People’s opinion towards Romani people.] Retrieved from // www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/SharedDocs/ Downloads/DE/publikationen/Expertisen/Expertise_Bevoelkerungseinstellungen_ gegenueber_Sinti_und_Roma_20140829.pdf ?blob=publicationFile&v=3. Accessed on May 10, 2018.

Dawn of Learning!    39 Baumert, J., Stanat, P., & Watermann, R. (2006). Herkunftsbedingte Disparitäten im Bildungswesen: Differenzielle Bildungsprozesse und Probleme der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit. [Origin related disparties in education sector: Differential education processes and concerns of distributive justice.] Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Bausinger, H. (1986). Kulturelle Identität – Schlagwort und Wirklichkeit. In Bausinger (Ed.), Inländer–Ausländer. Arbeitsmigration und kulturelle Identität. [Cultural ­identity – Phrase and Reality, in: Natives and Foreigners. Labour migration and ­cultural identity.] (pp. 141–159). Tübingen. Beckett, S. (1983). Worstward Ho. New York, NY: Grove Press. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1987). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit [The Social Construction of Reality. (1969)]. Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer. Bezirksregierung, A. (2011). Begegnung und Verständigung. Sinti und Roma in NRW. Schulische und schulbegleitende Förderung und Initiativen für Kinder aus Sintiund Roma-Familien. [Encounter and Understanding. Sinti and Roma in North Rhine-Westphalia. School and school-accompanying support and initiatives for children of Sinti- and Roma families.] Arnsberg/Essen. BGH und Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma. (2017): “Doppeltes Unrecht – Eine späte Entschuldigung”. [Federal Supreme Court and Central Council of German Sinti and Roma: “Double Injustice – A late Apology”] Retrieved from https:// zentralrat.sintiundroma.de/doppeltes-unrecht-ein-spaeteentschuldigung/. Accessed on October 9, 2018. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1971). Illusion der Chancengleichheit. [The Illusion of Equal Opportunities.] Stuttgart (Orig.1964). Brüggemann, C., & Friedman, E. (2017). The Decade of Roma Inclusion: Origins, actors, and legacies. European Education, 49(1), 1–9. Brüggemann, C., Hornberg, S., & Jonuz, E. (2013). Heterogenität und Benachteiligung – die Bildungssituation von Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. In S. Hornberg, & Ch. Brüggemann (Eds.), Die Bildungssituation von Sinti und Roma in Europa. [Heterogeneity and Discrimination – the Educational Situation of Sinti and Romani people in Germany, in: The Educational Situation of Sinti and Romani people in Europe.] (pp. 91–120). Münster: Waxmann Verlag. Bundesministerium des Inneren, (BMI). (2011). Bericht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland an die Europäische Kommission EU-Rahmen der nationalen Strategien zur Integration der Roma bis 2020. Integrierte Maßnahmenpakete zur Integration und Teilhabe der Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. [German Report for the European Commission on EU Framework for national Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020. Integrated Packages for integration and social participation of Sinti and Roma in Germany.] Berlin. Bundesministerium des Inneren, (BMI). (2014). Nationale Minderheiten. Minderheitenund Regionalsprachen in Deutschland. [National Minorities. Minority and regional ­languages in Germany.] Frankfurt a. M.: Zarbock GmbH & Co. KG. Danova, S. (Ed.). (2008). Decade watch: Roma activists assess the progress of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2007 update. Budapest, Hungary: Createch Ltd. Embring-Romang, U. (2002). Die Verfolgung der Sinti und Roma in Hessen zwischen 1870 und 1950. [The persecution of Sinti and Roma in the federal state of Hessen from 1870 to 1950.] Frankfurt a.M.: Brandes und Aspel. Emgbring-Romang, U. (2014). Ein unbekanntes Volk? Daten, Fakten und Zahlen. Zur Geschichte und Gegenwart der Sinti und Roma in Europa. [An unknown ­people? Data, facts and numbers. About history and present of Romani people in Europe.] Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Retrieved from http://www.bpb.de/ internationales/europa/sinti-und-roma-in-europa/179536/einunbekanntes-volkdaten-fakten-und-zahlen?p= all. Accessed on May 10, 2018.

40    Natascha Hofmann End, M., Herold, K., & Robel, Y. (2009). Antiziganistische Zustände. Zur Kritik eines allgegenwärtigen Ressentiments. [Antiziganistic States. Criticism of an Omnipresent Resentment.] Münster: Unrast Verlag. EU Roma Policy Coalition (ERPC) (Ed.). (2008). Towards a European policy on Roma inclusion. Brussels, Belgium: ERPC. European Commission. (2005). Lifelong learning program. The European Roma and Travellers Forum (Strasbourg-FR). 11/0029-G/1083. Retrieved from http:// www.scdc.org.uk/media/resources/Grundtvigcasestudies/The%20European%20 Roma%20and%20Travellers%20Forum%20(Strasbourg%20FR).pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Roma Grassroots Organisations Network (ERGO). Retrieved from http:// ergonetwork.org/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC). Retrieved from http://www.errc.org/who-we-are/ our-story. Accessed on July 12, 2018. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). (2007). Report on racism and xenophobia in the Member States of the EU. Vienna, Austria: FRA. Europäische Union (EU). (2011). EU-Rahmen für nationale Strategien zur Integration der Roma bis 2020. Brüssel. Retrieved from https://osteuropa.lpb-bw.de/fileadmin/ osteuropa/pdf/EU_Romastrategie.pdf EVZ – Stiftung “Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft” (2016). Gemeinsam für eine bessere Bildung. Empfehlungen zur gleichberechtigten Bildungsteilhabe von Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. [Joint for a better Education. Recommendations for an Equal Access to and Participation in General Education of Sinti and Romani people in Germany.] Berlin. Ferenc, Z. (2008). Indicator Working Group Report prepared by Martin Kahanec & the  Indicator Group. Retrieved from http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/ 9330_file7_indicator-working-group-report.pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Forum of European Roma Young People (FERYP). Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/ en/web/youth-roma/about-the-project Foucault, M. (1981). Archäologie des Wissens. Frankfurt am Main, p. 74. Gogolin, I., & Lange, I. (2011). Bildungssprache und durchgängige Sprachbildung. In Fürstenau, S. and Gomolla, I. (eds.): Migration und schulischer Wandel: Mehrsprachigkeit. [Educational language and continuous language-learning, in: Migration and school transition.] Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Guy, W. (Ed.). (2001). Between past and future. The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe. Hatfield: University Hertfordshire Press. Hannerz, U. (1996). Transnational Connections. Culture – People – Places. London and New York: Routledge. Haupert, A. (Ed.). (2007). Decade watch: Roma activists assess the progress of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, 2005–2006. Budapest: Createch Ltd. Heinschink, M. F., & Cech, P. (2013). Die Sprachen der Roma – Grundzüge der Romani Čhib und Perspektiven für den Unterricht. In S. Hornberg, & Ch. Brüggemann (Eds.). Die Bildungssituation von Sinti und Roma in Europa. [Languages of Romani people – Main features of Romani Čhib and perspectives for teaching, in: The Educational Situation of Sinti and Romani people in Europe.] (pp. 53–87). Münster: Waxmann Verlag. Hofmann, N. (2011). Fremde in der Fremde? Über gesellschaftliche Integrationsprozesse junger Roma. In M. Matter, & A. C. Cöster (Eds.). Fremdheit und Migration. Kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven für Europa. [Aliens in foreign places? About societal integration processes of young Roma, in: alienness and migration. Cultural studies perspective for Europe.] (pp. 97–116). Marburg: Tectum. Hofmann, N., & Óhidy, A., (2018). Mentoring-, Counselling- and Mediator Models to improve the Educational Situation of Sinti and Roma in Germany. In International

Dawn of Learning!    41 Dialogues on Education: Past and Present IDE – Online Journal (Vol. 5.1.). Retrieved from https://www.ide-journal.org/article/2018-volume-5-number-1mentoringcounselling-and-mediator-models-to-improve-the-educational-situationof-sinti-androma-in-germany/. Accessed on June 3, 2018. Hornberg, S. (2010). Schule im Prozess der Internationalisierung von Bildung. [School in the internationalisation process of education.] Münster: Waxmann. Huffschmid, A. (2001, August). Wider-Sprechen. Zur zapatstschen Selbstbehauptung. KultuRRevoluton Nr. 41/42 pp. 39–49. Hundsalz, A. (1982). Situation der Sinti in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. [Situation of Sinti in the Federal Republic of Germany.] Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag. International Steering Committee. (2004). Second meeting of the Roma Decade Steering Committee: Minutes and summary. Budapest, Hungary: International Steering Committee. International Steering Committee. (2005). Decade of Roma inclusion 2005–2015: Terms of reference, Bucharest, Romania: International Steering Committee. Jonuz, E. (2009). Stigma: Ethnizität. [Stigma Ethnicity.] Opladen: Budrich Verlag. Kaschuba, W. (1995). Kulturalismus: Vom Verschwinden des Sozialen im gesellschaftlichen Diskurs. In W. Kaschuba (Ed.). Kulturen – Identitäten – Diskurse. Perspektive Europäischer Ethnologie. Zeithorizonte Band 1. [Culturalism: Vanishing of social aspects in societal discourses, in: Cultures – Identities – Discourses. Perspectives of European Ethnologie.] (pp. 11–30). Berlin. Kovats, M. (2002). The European Roma question. Briefing Paper New Series No. 31. The Royal Institute of International Affairs, London. Krause, M. (1989). Verfolgung durch Erziehung. Eine Untersuchung über die jahrhunder­ telange Kontinuität staatlicher Erziehungsmaßnahmen im Dienste der Vernichtung kultureller Identität von Roma und Sinti. [Persecution through education. Examining the continuity of educational state measures purposing the extinction of cultural identity of Sinti and Roma.] Ammesbek bei Hamburg: Verlag an der Lottbek. Kressel, T. (2015). Roma und Sinti Bildungsberater an Hamburger Schulen. Eine Bestandsaufnahme. [Roma and Sinti Educational Advisors in Schools in Hamburg. A stocktaking.] Hamburg. Kullmann, A., Kushen, R., Rorke, B., Rövid, M., & Zentai, V. (2013). Civil Society monitoring on the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies and Decade Action Plans in 2012: Summary report. Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Kullmann, A., Kushen, R., Rövid, M., Szendrey, O., & Zentai, V. (2014). Civil Society monitoring on the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies and Decade Action Plans in 2012 and 2013: Summary report. Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Lauterbach, W., Lange, A., & Becker, R. (2003). Armut und Bildungschancen. Auswirkungen von Niedrigeinkommen auf den Schulerfolg am Beispiel des Übergangs von der Grundschule auf weiterführende Schulstufen. In C. Butterwegge, & M. Klundt (Eds.). Kinderarmut und Generationengerechtigkeit. Familien-und Sozialpolitik im demographischen Wandel. [Privation and educational prospects. Impacts of low income on school success exemplifying with cross-overs from primary to secondary school, in: Child poverty and generational equity. Welfare policies in times of demographic changes.] (pp. 153–170). 2. Aufl. Opladen. Law, I., & Kovats, M. (2018). Rethinking Roma. Identities, politicisation and new agendas (Mapping Global Racism). Berlin: Springer. Liégeois, J.-P. (1999). Die schulische Betreuung ethnischer Minderheiten. Das Beispiel der Sinti und Roma. [Schooling of ethnic minorities. The examplary case of Sinti and Roma] Berlin.

42    Natascha Hofmann Lindemann, F. (2005). Schule muss schmecken«. Ermutigende Erfahrungen junger Roma im deutschen Bildungswesen. [School has to be pleasurable. Encouraging experiences of young Roma in the German education sector.] Weinheim/Basel: Beltz. Margalit, G., & Matras, Y. (2007). Gypsies in Germany – German Gypsies? Identity and politics of Sinti and Roma in Germany. In R. Stauber, & R. Vago (Eds.). The Roma. A minority in Europe: Hstorical, political and social perspectives. Budapest: Central European University Press. Matras, Y. (2003). Die Sprache der Roma. Ein historischer Umriss. In Y. Matras, H. Winterberg, & M. Zimmermann (Eds.). Sinti, Roma, Gypsies. Sprache – Geschichte – Gegenwart. [The language of Romani people. A historical outline, in: sinti, Roma, Gypsies. Language – History – Present.] (pp. 231–261). Berlin: Metropol Verlag. Matter, M. (2015). Nirgendwo erwünscht. Zur Armutsmigration aus Zentral- und Südosteuropa in die Länder der EU-15 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Angehörigen der Roma-Minderheiten. [Nowhere welcome. Poverty-driven migration from Central and Southeastern Europe to EU-15 member states with particular regard to Roma minorities.] Schwalbach: Wochenschau Verlag. Mayring, P. (2002). Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung. [Introduction to Qualitative Social Research.] 5. überarb. Aufl. Weinheim and Basel: Beltz. Mengersen, O. von (2012). Sinti und Roma in der Schule – die Meinung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern. In Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma: Gleichberechtigte Teilhabe für Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. [Sinti and Roma in School – Views and opinions  of  teachers, in: Participation on equal terms for Sinti and Roma in Germany.] (pp. 77–114). Heidelberg. Mihok, B. (2001). Zurück nach Nirgendwo. Bosnische Roma-Flüchtlinge in Berlin. [Return to nowhere. Bosnian Romani refugees in Berlin.] Berlin: metropol Verlag. Mihok, B., & Widmann, P. (2005). Sinti und Roma als Feindbilder. [Sinti and Roma as enemy stereotypes.] (pp. 56–61). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Miskovic, M. (Ed.). (2013). Roma education in Europe. Practises, policies and politics. London: Routledge. Munoz, V. (2006). Bericht zur Bundespressekonferenz vom 21.02.2006, pp. 1–6. [Report to the Federal Press Conference on the 21st. February 2006]. Avaible at: http:// www.munoz.uri-text.de/20060221_Bundespressekonferenz_Munoz_deutsch.pdf. Accessed on May 10, 2018. Open Society Institute, EU Monitoring and Advocacy Program, Education Support Program. (2007). Equal access to quality education for Roma (Vols. 1 and 2). Budapest: Roma Participation Program. RAA. (2014). Bildungsaufbruch! Für die gleichberechtigte Teilhabe von Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. [Dawn of Education! For an equal participation of Sinti and Roma in Germany.] Berlin: Pinguindruck GmbH. Reemtsma, K. (1996). Sinti und Roma. Geschichte, Kultur, Gegenwart. München, Germany: Beck. REF Strategy Framework. (2021–2030). Retrieved from https://www.romaeducationfund. org/sites/default/files/documents/ref_strategicframework2030.pdf. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Regional Cooperation Council. (2016). Roma Integration 2020. Retrieved from https:// www.rcc.int/romaintegration2020/docs/29/roma-integration-2020-brochure. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Ries, J. (2011). Verfremdungen der Roma/Zigeuner. In M. Matter, & A. C. Cöster (Eds.). Fremdheit und Migration. Kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven für Europa. [Alienation of Roma/Gypsies, in: alienness and migration. Cultural studies perspective for Europe.] (pp. 77–96). Marburg: Tectum. Rolly, H. F. (2012). Ethnisierung der Bildungsbenachteiligung – Anforderungen an Programme für die Teilhabe von Sinti und Roma in Bildung und Ausbildung.

Dawn of Learning!    43 In Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma: Gleichberechtigte Teilhabe für Sinti und Roma in Deutschland. [Ethnicising of Disrimination in Education – Challenges to programs for Participation in General Education and Training of Sinti and Romani people, in: Equal Participation for Sinti and Romani people in Germany.] (pp. 68–76). Heidelberg. Roma Education Fund (REF). Over 200 textbooks reviewed by REF Junior researchers. Retrieved from http://www.romaeducationfund.org/news/ref/news-and-events/over200-textbooks-reviewed-ref-junior-researchers. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Rorke, B., Matache, M., & Friedman, E. (2015). A lost decade? Reflections on Roma Inclusion (2005–2015). Budapest, Hungary: Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation. Scherr, A., & Sachs, L. (2017). Bildungsbiografien von Sinti und Roma. Erfolgreiche Bildungsverläufe unter schwierigen Bedingungen. [Educational biographies of Sinti and Romani people. Successful Educational Careers of Sinti and Roma under difficult conditions.] Weinheim/Basel: Belz Juventa. Schlagintweit, R., & Rupprecht, M. (Eds.). (2007). Zwischen Integration und Isolation. Zur Lage von Kindern aus Roma-Familien in Deutschland und Südosteuropa. Berlin: Metropol Verlag. Schroeder, J. (2003). Dimensionen des “totalen Raums”. In Neumann et. al. (Ed.). Lernen am Rande der Gesellschaft. Bildungsinstitutionen im Spiegel von Flüchtlingsbiographien. [Dimensions of the “total space”, in: Learning on the edge of society. Educational institutions reflected through refugee biographies.] (pp. 379–398). Münster u.a. Seeger, S. (2013). Der Europarat. In M. Große & H.-G. Hüttmann (Eds.), Das Europalexikon, 2., aktual. Aufl. Bonn, Germany: Dietz. Retrieved from http://www.bpb.de/nachschlagen/lexika/das-europalexikon/176949/europarat. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Spivak, G. C. (2007). Can the Subaltern speak? Postkolonialität und subalterne Artikulation. [Can the Subaltern speak? Postcolonialism and subaltern articulation.] Wien: Turia & Kant, Wien. Stachwitz, R. (2006). Der nationalsozialistische Völkermord an Sinti und Roma in aktuellen deutschen Geschichtsbüchern [The National Socialist genocide of Romani ­people in current German history books]. Internationale Schulbuchforschung, 28 (2), 163–175. Statistisches Bundesamt, (SBA). (2011). Bevölkerung und Erwerbstätigkeit: Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund. Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus. [Population and Employment: Population with migratory backgroud. Results of the Mikrozensus survey.] Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. Stichweh, R. (2005). Inklusion und Exklusion. Studien zur Gesellschaftstheorie. Bielefeld, Germany: Transkript Verlag. Strauss, A. L. (1991). Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Datenanalyse in der empirischen soziologischen Forschung. Übergänge, Texte und Studien zu Handlung, Sprache und Lebenswelt. Band 10. [Basics of qualitative social research. Analysis of empirical sociological research. Transfers, Writings and surveys on action, language and living environment.] (pp. 90–123). München. Strauss, D. (2011). Studie zur aktuellen Bildungssituation deutscher Sinti und Roma. [Survey of the actual Educational Situation of Sinti an Romani people in Germany.] Retrieved from https://mediendienstintegration.de/fileadmin/Dateien/2011_Strauss_Studie_ Sinti_Bildung.pdf. Accessed on May 10, 2018. Surdu, M. (2002). Quality of education in schools with a high percentage of Roma pupils. Budapest, Hungary: Open Society Institute Budapest. Surdu, M., & Friedman, E. (2013). The Roma Education fund. In S. Hornberg & C. Brüggemann (Eds.), Die Bildungssituation von Sinti und Roma in Europa (pp. 35– 51). Münster, Germany: Waxmann Verlag. ternYpe – International Roma Youth Network. Retrieved from http://www.ternype.eu/. Accessed on July 12, 2018.

44    Natascha Hofmann UNICEF (Ed.). (2007). Breaking the cycle of exclusion: Roma children in South East Europe, Serbien. Voice of Roma (VoR). Retrieved from http://www.voiceofroma.com/. Accessed on July 12, 2018. von Dobeneck, F. (2006). Sinti in Freiburg. Auseinandersetzung mit einer deutschen Minderheit [Sinti in Freiburg. Approach to a German minority]. Zeitschrift für Volkskunde, 102, 43–66. Widmann, P. (2001). An den Rändern der Städte. Sinti und Jenische in der deutschen Kommunalpolitik. [On the edge of cities. Sinti and Jenische in German municipal ­politics.] Berlin: Metropol Verlag. World Bank. (2003). Briefing note. Conference: “Roma in an expanding Europe: Challenges for the future.” Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/872391468749375351/Roma-in-an-expanding-Europe-Challenges-for-the-future. Accessed on July 12, 2018. Zentralrat Deutscher Sinti und Roma (Ed.). (2017). 45 Jahre Bürgerrechtsarbeit deutscher Sinti und Roma/45 years of civil rights work of German Sinti and Roma. Heidelberg, Germany: Neumann Druck. Zülch, T. (1979). In Auschwitz vergast, bis heute verfolgt. Zur Situation der Roma [Zigeuner] in Deutschland und Europa. [Gased in Auschwitz, persecuted until today. About the situation of Roma [Gypsies] in Germany and Europe.] Reinbek: Rowohlt.

Chapter 3

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries: The Greek Case Panagiota Gkofa Abstract At a European level, despite the numerous policies developed in relation to the inclusion of Roma, Roma continue to be discriminated. With regard to education, Roma children remain among the lowest academic achievers in all European countries and the same is reported in Greece. This chapter discusses aspects of life for Roma living in Greece, with an emphasis on education: first, it details aspects of Greek Roma’s social and cultural life; second it focuses on Greek Roma’s education (educational situation, policies and supportive programmes for Roma children); third, it presents studies which have started to examine contexts where the Greek Roma have experienced some educational progression against the odds. Keywords: Greece; Roma students; exclusionary practices; supportive educational programmes; lifelong learning; educational success

The Roma in Greece: An Introduction At European level, despite the numerous policies developed in relation to the inclusion of Roma, in practical terms, significant changes in Roma lives have not been reported (Miskovic, 2013). Roma remain marginalised and discriminated in all EU countries (D’Arcy, 2014). According to some researchers, Roma form the most disadvantaged ethnic minority in Europe (Bhopal & Myers, 2009; D’Arcy, 2014; Lloyd & McCluskey, 2008; Themelis, 2009a). As far as education is concerned, Roma children remain among the lowest academic achievers in many European countries (Symeou, Luciak, & Gobbo, 2009). In Greece, the situation for the Roma resembles the one reported in other European countries. The following text details aspects of life for Roma living in Greece, with an emphasis on education.

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 45–66 Copyright © 2020 by Panagiota Gkofa Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191008

46    Panagiota Gkofa

Number, Groups, Names and Legal Status In the Greek national context, the Roma are Greek citizens who are not officially recognised as a national/ethnic or linguistic minority (Dragonas, 2012; Kostadinova, 2011).1 The identity associated with Greek citizenship was given to the Roma living in Greece by the Greek government in 1955 by Legislative Decree 3370/1955 (Council of Europe, 2011). However, this decree remained a dead letter until 1978– 1979 when some circulars coming from the Ministry of Interior settled the issue once and for all (Dragonas, 2012).2 Yet, some Roma are still not registered. The missing registrations of children – or registrations with only their family name (without a first name) – remains a problem (Dragonas, 2012). Roma’s precarious legal status results in there being little data available about the Roma community in Greece (Dragonas, 2012). Greek censuses have not collected data regarding ethnic affiliation, language or religion since 1951. As a result, there is no official calculation of the Roma population in Greece and the same is true for the field of education (Ziomas, Bouzas, & Spyropoulou, 2011). The Roma population in Greece is estimated to be at least 150,000, while some reports raise the number to 265,000 (Parthenis & Fragoulis, 2016) (about 3% of the total population).3 It should be noted that the aspects described in this report are general aspects that can be said to characterise the Roma in Greece, but not all of them to the same degree, because the Roma in Greece are not a homogeneous group (Markou, 2008; Nikolaou, 2009). The heterogeneity of the Roma in Greece is recognised

1

The Muslim minority in Thrace is the only officially recognised minority in Greece under the Treaty of Lausanne signed in 1923, and is recognised on the basis of religious diversity and not on ethnicity (Giakoumaki, 2007). 2 Document 69468/212/20.10.78 Γ.Δ. edited by the Ministry of Interior Affairs with the title ‘Τακτοποίηση από απόψϵως ιθαγϵνϵίας των διαβιούντων στη χώρα μας Αθιγγάνων’ [‘Arrangement of the nationality issue concerning the Roma/Gypsies who live in our country’] and document 16701/ 12.3.1979 Γ.Δ. ‘Πϵρί της ϵγγραϕής των αδήλωτων Αθιγγάνων’ [‘Regarding the registration of the unregistered Roma/Gypsies’] (see Moucheli, 1996). 3 At this point, it should be noted that there are some Muslim Roma in Greece. In particular, the Muslim minority of Western Thrace (area in the northeast of Greece) is regarded as an indigenous religious minority (Lytra, 2007). The Muslims in ­Western Thrace are Greek citizens (Askouni, 2006) and, although the situation is more complex in reality, the Muslim minority can generally be categorised to consist of three groups: (a) the minority Turks; (b) the Pomaks (originally Slavophone) and (c) the Roma (Trubeta, 2001). Although these Muslim Roma people frequently describe themselves as minority Turks, they are seen as Roma not only by the (non-minority) Greeks but also by the minority Turks (Trubeta, 2001). According to Lytra (2007), the minority population of Western Thrace is estimated at 80,000–90,000 people. The 1923 Lausanne Treaty ‘recognises, regulates and protects the present legal status as well as the linguistic, cultural, educational and religious rights of the Muslim minority of Western Thrace’ (Lytra, 2007, p. 42). Turkish has developed as the lingua franca of the minority (Lytra, 2007).

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    47 in terms of language, religion, lifestyle, social and economic status and finally the degree of their acceptance from the dominant society (Trubeta, 2008). For example, when Markou (2008) described Roma’s housing and living conditions, he noted some considerable differences between different areas. In particular, in some regions, such as in Agia Varvara (in Athens) and Dendropotamos (in Thessaloniki), the Roma, in general, live in good conditions while in other regions, such as Aspropyrgos and Zefyri (regions in Athens) the opposite is true (Markou, 2008). Zachos (2011) uses the term ‘Roma groups’ to avoid homogenisation. In Greek literature, the most common words used for the Roma are ‘Tsigganos’ and ‘Athigganos’. This word is similar to others used in many countries, such as Tsigane in France, Cigano in Portugal, Cigán in Czech and other Slavic languages when outsiders talk about Roma. Bakker et al. (2000) explain the two theories on the origin of this name: (a) it may be derived from the Kurdish (Iranian) word asingar which means blacksmith – an occupation of men in many Roma groups and (b) it may be derived from the term athingani, a word used to describe people who were considered heretics by the Orthodox church in South-Eastern Europe. Recent Greek political documents (circulars) (2008)4 have started to use the term Roma to refer to the Roma population in Greece. Most European countries have also adopted the name ‘Roma’ or ‘Roma and Sinti’ for use in official contexts (Bakker et al., 2000). Although the word Roma must have been the original name for all European Gypsies, not all of them call themselves Roma today; some groups call themselves Kalo, Manuš, Romano, Romanichal or Sinti (Bakker et al., 2000). ‘Even though not all speakers of Romani would call themselves Roma, virtually all call their language Romanes or used to do so in earlier documented periods’ (Bakker et al., 2000, p. 29). The lack of an agreed term for the Roma reflects one essential characteristic of the Roma globally: their separation in small groups and subgroups which differ from eachother (Terzopoulou & Georgiou, 1996). In this report, the term Roma is used to refer to the group that is mostly called ‘Tsigganoi’ in Greece in everyday life. This term has been chosen as the most accepted common name and thus the most understandable at a European or international level. Concurrently, it is consistent with the term used in recent Greek political circulars.

Social Situation of the Roma in Greece Greece has ratified all major human rights treaties and there is a broad array of national legal instruments which prevent discrimination (Dragonas, 2012). Despite the inclusive discourse concerning diversity which predominates at a theoretical level and in government policy, the Roma experience social exclusion in Greece (Chrysakis, 2004; Council of Europe, 2011; Georgiadis & Zisimos, 2012). The majority of the Roma are poor, highly marginalised and frequently live in extreme conditions at the edges of urban areas (Kostouli & Mitakidou, 2009).

4

An indicative example is the following circular: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs (2008). Ministerial Circular (Αριθ. Πρωτ. 11684/Γ1/10.9.2008) ‘Εγγραϕή και ϕοίτηση Ρομά’ [Roma’s school enrolment and attendance].

48    Panagiota Gkofa Sardelić (2017) cites recent data coming from the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) in 2016, according to which 80% of Roma live below the country specific poverty line (Greece is included in the nine EU Member States in which the survey was conducted together with Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Spain, Croatia, Hungary, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia). The Roma in Greece are often treated in a pejorative way by non-Roma in their daily lives (Chatzisavvidis, 2007). Themelis (2009c), based on data coming from the European Roma Rights Centre (2003), notes that, in Greece, many Roma groups on the outskirts of Athens and elsewhere face residential segregation and sometimes systematic expulsion from their camps The overwhelming majority of the Roma in Greece are not considered to be ‘travellers’ as they usually have permanent residences. Markou (2008) asserts that about 70% (a continually increasing percentage) of the Roma live in permanent residences; about 22% live permanently in camps set up by Roma after occupying land in the city limits; 5% divide their time between two different regions and only 3% travel. However, the living conditions, even for those permanently settled, are often very poor and in camps they are often unhealthy, due to lack of infrastructure (electricity, water, sanitation) (Dragonas, 2012; Markou, 2008). According to the Panhellenic Network of Municipalities for the support of Greek Roma [Δίκτυο για την υποστήριξη των Ελλήνων Τσιγγάνων] in 2000 (cited in Markou, 2008), only those Roma permanently installed in homes have access to modern means of living. According to Hatzinikolaou and Mitakidou (2005), a lack of housing often leads to school dropouts or school failure and the eventual social exclusion of many Roma children. Trading (of clothing, fruit and vegetables, electronics) forms the main economic activity of the Roma (Markou, 2008). Because of the modernisation of the Greek economy and mass production and consumption, the Roma have abandoned their traditional occupations, such as making and repairing chairs or baskets, copper art and working as blacksmiths (Markou, 2008). The only traditional Roma occupation that is evident today is the music industry (Markou, 2008). The income of Roma, in most cases, is not steady, as it mainly depends on their employment, which is seasonal (Ziomas, Bouzas, N., & Spyropoulou, 2011). In general terms, Roma income is low and, as a result, the overwhelming majority of households have an income, that is, below the poverty line in Greece (European Commission, 2009). Most Roma have no health insurance (Labridis, 2004), which means that they have limited access to medical treatment in Greece, experience low life expectancy averages and high infant and child mortality rates, which reflect their poor health levels (Council of Europe, 2011; European Commission, 2009; Triantafyllidou, 2012). It could be argued that the Greek Roma’s levels of health prevention, family planning, dental health and vaccination are much lower compared to the general population. Indicatively, Dragonas (2012) cites data from the European Survey on Health and the Roma Community in 2009 which showed that Greece has the second highest rate of children (35%) who do not follow the child vaccination programme. The Roma are confronted with many problems in their daily living conditions, employment and education (Nikolaou, 2009). The situation appears to be more difficult for Roma women as they face multiple forms of discrimination (such as underage and forced marriages, violence and trafficking)

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    49 (European Commission, 2016). Drydakis (2012) states that there is a wage gap between Roma and non-Roma female workers which is explained by prejudices against Roma women regardless of their educational attainment and job status. In general, the Roma are underrepresented in jobs corresponding to higher educational levels (professional, administrative, specialised technical vocations) (European Commission, 2009). At the same time, few Roma hold jobs which require elementary professional training, such as employment in the service provision sectors, waiters, hairdressers, salespersons at stores and car mechanics. Nevertheless, the market ‘provides’ a role for the Roma in certain occupations, such as recycling work, itinerant trade and junk dealing, which are practised almost exclusively by Roma people. In other unskilled occupations, such as land work, the percentage of Roma workers is also significant (European Commission, 2009). A stereotypical image of the Roma is frequently presented in the Greek media which, for the most part, represents the Roma in a negative way (Dragonas, 2012; Labridis, 2004). Topics regarding Roma criminal activity and violence in Roma settlements predominate (Dragonas, 2012). Karpozilos (2004) argues that, in general, the newspapers contribute to the development and reproduction of the dipole of defining the ‘us and the others’ and this context produces a certain ‘Roma type’. It should also be noted that there are no Roma members of the Greek Parliament. However, few Roma get elected at the municipal level. In 2004, a Roma political party was established but received few votes and was soon dissolved (Dragonas, 2012). In this context, it is unsurprising that Roma children experience inequalities in their education.

Culture and Language/s Particular characteristics which are dominant in the traditional Roma lifestyle and culture seem to be preserved by most Roma in Greece (Chatzisavidis, 2007).5 The community language of the Roma is Romani, a spoken language, which scholars believe is derived from Sanskrit (O’Hanlon & Holmes, 2004) and is probably linked to Hindi and Punjabi (Lander, 2011). There are dialects in the Romani language but ‘to a certain extent all Roma people understand one another’ (Bakker et al., 2000, p. 69).6 In Greece, the Roma mainly speak the Erli and Arli dialects (Bakker et al., 2000). However, Skourtou (2016) cites findings from academics involved in Roma education programmes according to which the Roma in Greece tend to speak Greek more often than Romani. The Roma in Greece frequently practice traditional customs and follow different practices compared to the dominant Greek community. For example, fewer than half of the men who should serve in the army enlist for their military service

5

Usually, the Roma in Greece are recognised as Roma because of their physical features, such as their darker complexion (Triantafyllidou, 2012). 6 Nevertheless, in some cases, understanding can be limited as the language has changed in different directions in different areas (Bakker et al., 2000). This could be explained by the argument that Romani is often cited as ‘a recipient language for borrowings’ (Matras, 2002, p. 249).

50    Panagiota Gkofa (European Commission, 2009). In many cases, the Roma express different ideas concerning gender roles, reflected in the dominance of a patriarchal family structure (Chatzisavidis, 2007), and they often get married under age (Triantafyllidou, 2012) and have many children. Some Roma (1/3) get married following the practice of traditional Roma weddings, which are not recognised by the Greek state (Dragonas, 2012). As a result, these families are not eligible for allowances or reductions offered to families by the Greek state and their children are considered to be born out of wedlock (Dragonas, 2012). According to Vaxevanoglou (2001, p. 149), ‘Roma children become adolescents early by having many responsibilities; Roma adolescents become adults early by creating their own family; Roma adults become grandparents before their 40s’. Collectivity is a significant value in the Roma community (Lidaki, 1997). Roma relationships tend to be regulated by customary law – and not the state law (Lidaki, 1997). Chatzissavidis (2007) notes that in Greece, most Roma are Orthodox Christians, although about 20% of the Roma in Greece are Muslims, who live mainly in Thrace, and a very small percentage of the Roma follow the Pentecostal Church. It should be noted that many aspects of the traditional Roma culture and lifestyle seem to be similar to those experienced by the poorest groups of Greeks some decades ago. Vaxevanoglou (2001) makes the same claim for the Roma family structure. The Roma are widely considered to be uneducated.7 Kostadinova (2011) cites a recent study led by Spain’s Fundacion Secretariado Gitano in 2009 which revealed that Roma literacy and educational levels are much lower than those of the rest of the population in older EU member states, with 83% of Greek Roma being presented as having no education at all. At the same time, Roma are widely considered to undervalue education. In some cases, researchers seem to understand Roma’s educational disadvantage as linked with Roma culture: formal schooling is seen as in tension with traditional family-based learning in the Roma community (Lee & Warren, 1991; Levinson, 2008; Smith, 1997). Kyuchukov (2000, p. 274) calls formal schooling ‘a non-Roma world’ where school knowledge is different from the one transmitted through the Roma community in the traditional way. In contrast, Mitakidou and Tressou (2007) reject arguments of this type as untrue for the Roma in Greece. They explain that, through these claims, Roma students’ lack of attendance and elevated school dropout rates are presented as a conscious choice made by the Roma in order to avoid their assimilation into the dominant non-Roma culture. Magka and Mpempe (2007), Roma women who are active in the Panhellenic Cultural Educational Creative Female Roma Association (Πανϵλλήνιος Εκπολιτιστικός Μορϕωτικός Δημιουργικός Γυναικϵίος Σύλλογος Ρομ Δϵνδροποτάμου) in Dendropotamos (Thessaloniki), strongly assert that education will enable Roma children to escape poverty and social exclusion and they call on teachers to help their dream come true. The problem, as they see it, is exclusion

7

Okely (1983) makes a distinction between Roma’s ‘schooling’ and ‘education’. She argues that Roma children are often not being ‘schooled’ but they are ‘educated’ inside their traditional family system (e.g. they get basic knowledge regarding the identification of different scrap metals).

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    51 and not a ‘choice’ (by the Roma) not to participate in schooling. The aspects described above are general aspects that can be said to characterise the Roma in Greece, but not all of them to the same degree, because Roma in Greece are not a homogeneous group as explained above (Markou, 2008; Nikolaou, 2009; Trubeta, 2008). Although, in Greece there are many differences among the Roma, some aspects of traditional culture and lifestyle are dominant for some Roma and less so for others. It makes sense to suggest that some Roma probably experience less, or less obvious, inequalities in their lives compared to other Roma. However, all the Roma, regardless of the differences within the community, often experience widespread prejudice and discrimination in Greece (Dragonas, 2012). This fact is eloquently expressed by Lidaki (1997) who states that whatever success the Roma achieve, they are always considered to be Gypsies8 by the non-Roma.

Roma in the Greek Education System Theoretical Perspectives Framing Roma’s Education in Greece Today, in Greece, intercultural education frames Roma’s education and many relevant interventions. The term ‘intercultural education’9 first appeared in Greek literature in the late 1980s and was associated with the integration of repatriated Greek pupils10 in Greek schools (Markou, 1995). Before the 1980s, a homogenous ethnic tradition was predominant in Greece (Giakoumaki, 2007) based on Greek language, Greek-Orthodox religion, (Greek) national

8

The term ‘Gypsies’ has often negative connotations. Gropas and Triandafyllidou (2011) distinguish between the Greek terms ‘intercultural’ (διαπολιτισμική-diapolitismiki) and ‘multicultural’ (πολυπολιτισμική-polypolitismiki). They explain that in Greek academic discourse, the term ‘intercultural education’ is considered as a normative concept which prescribes a desired state of affairs and a prescriptive approach to the goals of education. In contrast, ‘multicultural’ and ‘multiculturalism’ are seen as descriptive terms which, without valuative connotations, refer to a state of affairs, notably the coexistence of different cultures and ethnic or national groups within one society (Gropas & Triandafyllidou, 2011). 10 The term ‘repatriated’ refers to Greeks who have returned to Greece after having lived abroad for many years or to people of Greek origin who have ‘migrated’ to Greece. In addition to people of Greek descent who have come back to Greece, the multiculturalism of Greek society is marked by the existence of other groups such as foreign workers, Roma and the Muslim minority of Thrace (Markou, 1993). The term ‘foreigner’ refers to people who have moved to Greece as immigrants from foreign countries. According to Palaiologou and Faas (2012), 150,000 co-ethnic returnees from the former Soviet Union (Pontic Greeks) and nearly 240,000 ethnic Greek Albanians from southern Albania (Vorioepirotes) arrived in Greece in the late 1980s and during the 1990s. Moreover, during the 1990s and 2000s, Greece received migrants from eastern European, Asian and African countries. In total, the legal immigrant population, mainly including Albanians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Georgians, Ukrainians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, was around 700,000. 9

52    Panagiota Gkofa consciousness and descent (Tsitselikis, 2006) – the Muslim minority in Thrace was the only exception. Thus, the Roma in Greece are marginalised in linguistic (Romani) and ethnic/national terms (Tsitselikis, 2006). The Greek state attempted measures with an emphasis on Greek language (Markou, 1993), such as preparatory classes focussing on Greek, in order to address repatriated students’ educational needs. Interest by the Greek state in Roma education was first expressed in 1981, when efforts were made to expand the programmes of the General Secretariat for Adult Education (Γϵνική Γραμματϵία Λαϊκής Επιμόρϕωσης) to Roma adults (Mavrommatis, 2008). The first Special Centres for Adult Education (Ειδικά Κέντρα Λαϊκής Επιμόρϕωσης) were founded in 1983 and provided the first programme for the Roma, which targeted the Roma in Agia Varvara (area in Athens) and Kato Achaia (near Patras). In 1987, the Ministry of Education requested the General Secretariat for Adult Education to make educational provision for Roma of school age as well (Mavrommatis, 2008). According to Gotovos (2002), Roma were considered different from the dominant group in a linguistic and cultural sense. After 1996, in Greece, significant efforts were made to address the issue of education for immigrants’ children, efforts which also included the Roma and the Muslim minority in Western Thrace (Nikolaou, 2005). Intercultural education in Greece was officially established by the Law 2413/1996, JO A124 ‘Η ϵλληνική παιδϵία στο ϵξωτϵρικό, η διαπολιτισμική ϵκπαίδϵυση και άλλϵς διατάξϵις’ [Greek education abroad, intercultural education and other directives]. According to this law (p. 41), the aim of intercultural education was the organisation and operation of primary schools and secondary schools in order to provide education to young people with educational, social, cultural or educational differences and special curricula with additional or alternative courses were to be applied. This legalisation of intercultural education represented a shift from earlier approaches based on a ‘deficit hypothesis’ towards the recognition of ‘cultural distinctiveness’ and the ‘difference hypothesis’, which meant that policy-makers would now recognise cultural and ethnic differences in Greece (Damanakis, 2005). However, Gropas and Triandafyllidou (2011) argue that, although intercultural education policies in Greece appear plural in the letter of the law, in daily practice, understandings of national (Greek) identity predominate over general principles of recognition of cultural diversity. The current conditions of Roma children in Greece are explored in the following section.

Exclusionary Practices against Roma Students Inclusive and intercultural practices are promoted at a policy level in Greece, however, Roma children still experience educational inequalities in many cases. Separation practices affecting Roma children at school have been reported (Dragonas, 2012; Nikolaou, 2009). Vergidis (1995) refers to the ‘active’ and ‘passive’ exclusion of Roma children at school. Varnava-Skoura, Vergidis, and Kassimi (2012) discuss about active exclusion where Roma’s enrolment is

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    53 refused and passive exclusion where Roma’s physical presence in class is tolerated but the Roma students do not participate in the educational process. These exclusions are evidenced by data which shows that some Roma children still attend separate types of schooling (Dragonas, 2012). According to data coming from the ‘Eurybase – Organisation of the education system in Greece 2008/09 (2009)’, – during the school year 2007–2008, 2,842 Roma children attended ‘reception’ classes in primary education. There are also complaints at a European level about the racism and exclusion experienced by many Roma in Greece (Dragonas, 2012). Although the official policy discourse presents the mainstream school as both desirable and the predominant school for Roma students in Greek education, in practice Roma students experience various forms of discrimination. For example, in some cases, Roma students get educated in separate classes inside the mainstream school (Dragonas, 2012). In other cases (such as in areas with a large Roma population), there are a small number of schools serving only Roma children (Varnava-Skoura, Vergidis, & Kassimi, 2012). These schools are considered to be like other mainstream schools in the national education system and follow the same curriculum as the mainstream schools. The case of Aspropyrgos (a city southwest of Athens) described below by New (2013) illustrates that the active exclusion and segregation of Roma students is continued. In particular, in September 2004, local officials prevented Roma children’s enrolment at the local primary school in Aspropyrgos. In this area, Roma mainly live in settlements in poor conditions, with reduced access to water, sanitation and electricity. Signs such as ‘No Roma child will enter this school. You are not going to have access here, that’s all!’, signalled the local non-Roma parents’ attitudes (New, 2013). After a court hearing to resolve this dispute, Roma students were able to attend the primary school, although they were placed in a separate building where only Roma students were registered. Despite the Court’s decision to protect Roma rights, in this case, the outcome was that a segregated and separate school was set up (New, 2013).

Data Concerning Roma Students’ School Registration in Greece As noted earlier, the Roma do not hold an officially minority status in Greece. The above mentioned, combined with the fact that the Greek censuses do not collect data regarding ethnic affiliation, language or religion, lead to there being little data available regarding the Roma community in any field (Dragonas, 2012). Therefore, any data concerning Roma education should be treated with caution, as they might not have been collected in systematic and uniform ways (Kostouli & Mitakidou, 2009). Gkofa (2016), in her thesis, presents some data showing that during the school year 2011–2012, 13,734 Roma students were registered for primary education (this number comprises around 2.5% of the total student population of all children in Greece). 53% of them were boys and 43% were girls. 1,204 (8.7%) of the Roma students in primary education had attended preschool education (nursery school/Nipiagogio/Νηπιαγωγϵίο) which is compulsory in Greece (for one year). During the school year 2011–2012, 2,141 Roma students were registered for secondary education.1,313 of these Roma students were boys (61.3%)

54    Panagiota Gkofa and 828 were girls (38.7%). 96% of the Roma students who attended secondary education during the school year 2011–2012 were attending lower high school (Gymnasio/Γυμνάσιο), which is compulsory in Greece. The rest, 4% (82 Roma students), attended non-compulsory types of secondary schools. 82 (61%) of the Roma who attended non-compulsory secondary education were males and 32 out of 82 (39%) were females. Furthermore, only 24 of the totals (29.2%) attended (general) high school while most Roma students attended non-compulsory types of secondary schools which tend to be related to gaining technical and professional skills and do not easily lead on to entrance to ‘elite’ tertiary institutions. In addition, although the data does not relate to the same cohort of Roma students, it can be observed that as Roma students move on through schooling, gender tends to shape their levels of school registration (i.e. to say less girls than boys continue into higher levels of education). It should be noted that the data refers exclusively to Roma students registered at schools according to data accessed from the Greek Ministry of Education in 2013. In 2007, Chatzissavidis (2007) noted that almost half of the Roma children of school age were still not registered at school and many Roma children continue to drop out early without acquiring basic reading and writing skills. As a result, the above figures only partially describe the current situation for Roma education in Greece. Access to data related to schools where only Roma students are registered was not available. Because of the fact that the Roma are not regarded as a separate group in Greece, schools where only Roma students are registered are not identified as forming a separate category. However, according to some information collected from various sources, it seems that in 2006, 14 schools of this kind existed and 15% of the Roma students who were attending primary education were registered at them.11 There is no reason to believe that these Roma schools no longer exist, as they remained unaffected by the changes the Ministry of Education attempted under the merging and foundation of primary and secondary schools for the school year 2011–2012 (Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, 2011). Moreover, new Roma schools have been established, as shown in the example of Aspropyrgos detailed above (New, 2013). According to Themelis (2009b), during recent years, access to secondary and tertiary education has become easier for disadvantaged groups such as the Roma. However, it is estimated that a very small percentage (probably less than 10%) of Roma children who complete primary school continue to attend high school, of which three of its six years are compulsory in Greece. Finally, there is no available data concerning the attendance of Roma at institutions of higher education (Mavrommatis, 2008)

11

During the school year 2005–2006, 9,884 Roma students were registered at primary schools. 1,477 of these Roma students were registered at Roma schools in the following Greek areas: (Α) West Attica (Zefiri), (Β) Achaea (Meganitis), (C) Euboea ­(Kastella), (D) Elis (Kentro), (Ε) Karditsa (Karditsa and Sofades), (F) Corinthia (Zevgolatio), (G) Cyclades (Karterados, Mesaria and Vothonas) and (H) Xanthi (Xanthi, ­Kimmeria and Evlalos).

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    55 Policies and Supportive Educational Programs Addressing and/or Involving Roma Education Greece has developed a national strategy for Roma integration focusing on the axes of healthcare, housing, employment and education under the European Framework for National Roma Integration strategies from now until 2020. In this report, emphasis is put on describing measures regarding education. According to the Report on the implementation of the EU framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (European Commission, 2014), Greece is one of the member states which need to put desegregation measures in place so that Roma students do not attend separate classes. Moreover, desegregation measures should be accompanied by awareness-raising activities among both Roma and non-Roma, ensuring access to quality-inclusive early childhood education and care, as well as pre-school education. Proper monitoring of enrolment and attendance is also necessary (European Commission, 2014). Greece seems to be one of the member states which need to make further efforts to achieve Roma inclusion (European Commission, 2014). According to the European Commission’s report Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States 2016 (European Commission, 2016), the only promising example presented for Greece relates to the project ‘With Roma at the Museum’ which fought stereotypes and prejudices against the Roma as well as some mainstream measures protecting Roma women and children. In particular, according to the European Commission’s assessment for Greece, systematic measures are needed to reinforce inclusion of Roma children in all levels of education, including early childhood education and care, preschool and primary education. Proper monitoring of participation levels as well as early school leaving, and low achievement is necessary with provision of support measures where needed. Desegregation measures need to be put in place. Vocational education and training should be prioritised. (European Commission, 2016, p. 58) In what follows, some positive policies and measures implemented in Greece towards supporting the Roma and their schooling are described.

The Programme ‘Education of Roma Children’ [Εκπαίδευση των παιδιών Ρομά] During the last two decades, considerable attempts have been made to encourage the educational inclusion of Roma students, especially through programmes funded by the Greek State and conducted by Greek universities and aimed – mainly – at encouraging Roma children to attend school during the compulsory phase of education. The University of Ioannina coordinated the programme for

56    Panagiota Gkofa the education of Roma children from 1997 until 2004, aiming at improving the school attendance of Roma children and their integration into the educational system (Varnava-Skoura et al., 2012). The programme has led to some positive results regarding a number of variables including an increase in Roma children’s school enrolment, their transition to secondary school and completion of compulsory education (Varnava-Skoura et al., 2012). For instance, according to Gotovos (2002, p. 171), ‘in 1997, only 25% of Roma children aged 6–12 years attended primary school. This percentage had risen to 76% in June 2002’. The programme was then coordinated by the University of Thessaly aiming to reduce dropout rates and improve school integration (Varnava-Skoura et al., 2012) and some years later was implemented by the Department of Elementary Education of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki for the counties of Macedonia and Thrace and the Centre for Intercultural Education (Faculty of Philosophy, University of Athens) for the other Greek counties aiming, primarily, at boosting the attendance of Roma at preschool and compulsory education.12 Despite the attempts made by these programmes, significant problems regarding the education of Roma are still reported (Dragonas, 2012; Nikolaou, 2009). For instance, Farkas (2014) cites the survey conducted by the Fundamental Rights Agency in Member States, according to which, in Greece, more than 35% of Roma children do not attend school. Mavroyiorgos (2014) highlights the relative ineffectiveness of separate interventions (Roma programmes implemented in Greece since 1997) despite their high cost. He claims that, especially nowadays, because of the economic crisis, many students are underprivileged and are in need of additional educational support. In contrast, he recommends the implementation of holistic programmes aimed at tackling social exclusion (rather than targeting specific groups, such as the Roma, immigrants and repatriated, separately). Another point made by some researchers regarding the limited effectiveness of these interventions relates to the issue of the involvement of Roma in them. Kostouli and Mitakidou (2009) point out that policy attempts in Greece have involved implementing programmes designed by experts in the field but have not included people from the communities they study. They suggest that, in order for school changes to be successful, people from the Roma community need to undertake these interventions (Kostouli & Mitakidou, 2009).

Zones of Educational Priority (ZEP): Reception and Tutorial Classes and Other Supportive Tutorials Roma children are often taught through supportive programmes which address students with special characteristics. The ZEP do not target the Roma exclusively but refer to the Roma explicitly when stating that they address all students who face difficulties on the basis of their fluency in the Greek language or in terms 12

The programme ‘Education of Roma children’ [Εκπαίδϵυση των παιδιών Ρομά] is expected to continue for the current school year.

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    57 of their achievement. According to the Greek Law13 and the relevant document from the Greek Ministry of Education,14 since 2010, ZEP (Ζώνϵς Εκπαιδϵυτικής Προτϵραιότητας) have been implemented towards offering academic support to those students who do not speak Greek (or are not fluent in Greek). This programme includes:  1. The Reception Classes (Τάξϵις Υποδοχής) which run simultaneously alongside the mainstream courses and are designed to help students adapt and fully integrate within a reasonable time into the mainstream classes for which they are registered. There are two levels of reception classes: (i) Reception Classes I (attendance up to one year), for students who do not speak Greek at all and (ii) Reception Classes II (attendance up to three years) for students with moderate levels of competency. The students attend their regular mainstream classes, but at the same time they attend some language courses outside the regular classroom.  2. The Supportive Tutorial Classes (Ενισχυτικά Φροντιστηριακά Τμήματα) which provide additional after school instructional support to students (mainly Roma, foreigners, repatriates, refugees and socially vulnerable groups) who have not attended reception classes and face language difficulties or have attended reception courses but still face difficulties in their mainstream classes. The schools where the aforementioned ZEP operate for the school year 2017–2018 are named by the Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (Ministerial Decision 118066/Δ1/2017-ΦΕΚ 2639/2017/Β/ 28.07.2017).15 Additional support is also provided to students who need extra academic help. In particular, in primary education, supportive tutorials (enishytikh didaskalia/ ϵνισχυτική διδασκαλία) can be offered to students mainly in the two first classes of primary school. This is delivered in small groups and covers literacy and numeracy for one to two teaching hours per day, with a maximum six hours per week.16 Similar educational interventions are provided at the secondary level, 13

Law 3879/2010, JO A163 (21.09.2010), Articles 26 §1α and §1β. Ανάπτυξη της Διά Βίου Μάθησης και λοιπές διατάξϵις [Development of Lifelong Learning and other directives]. 14 Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2016). Document “Οδηγίϵς και κατϵυθύνσϵις για την ίδρυση και λϵιτουργία Τάξϵων Υποδοχής (ΤΥ) ΖΕΠ για το σχολικό έτος 2016–2017 σϵ δημοτικά σχολϵία της χώρας” [Guidelines for the establishment and operation of the ZEP Reception Classes in Greek schools for the school year 2016–2017] (Αρ.Πρωτ. 152029/Δ1/19-09-2016/ΥΠΑΙΘ, 7Ω764653ΠΣ-69Ε). 15 Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017a). Ministerial Decision 118066/Δ1/ 2017-ΦΕΚ 2639/2017/Β/28.07.2017 “Ένταξη Σχολικών Μονάδων Πρωτοβάθμιας Εκπαίδϵυσης στις Ζώνϵς Εκπαιδϵυτικής Προτϵραιότητας (ΖΕΠ), όπου δύνανται να λϵιτουργήσουν Τάξϵις Υποδοχής ΖΕΠ” [Inclusion of primary schools into the Zones of Educational Priority where Reception Classes can operate]. 16 Presidential Decree 462/1991, JO 171. Αξιολόγηση και ϵνισχυτική διδασκαλία μαθητών Δημοτικού Σχολϵίου [Assessment and in-school remedial tutoring of primary school pupils]. Article 5. Ενισχυτική διδασκαλία [Remedial Tutoring].

58    Panagiota Gkofa both in lower high schools (enishytikh didaskalia/ϵνισχυτική διδασκαλία) and in high schools (additional teaching support/πρόσθϵτη διδακτική στήριξη). As far as the additional teaching support in high schools is concerned, students in groups of five to 20 individuals can take part in any courses offered (1–3 hours per day). According to the relevant document about its organisation and implementation,17 the aim of this programme is to reduce the numbers of school dropouts as well as to raise achievement levels thereby increasing the chances of these students progressing to higher education.

Provision of Specialised Support to Socially Vulnerable Groups from Psychologists and Social Workers at School In September 2017, the Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs decided18 to provide support to Roma students through the services of social workers and psychologists at schools. Such services are not provided widely in Greek primary and secondary education except for the cases of special school units. However, during the current school year 2017–2018, social workers and psychologists are appointed to work with students coming from socially vulnerable groups in schools of general and vocational education in order to provide support, counselling and treatment when required. More specifically, they are expected to work closely with the teachers and the students involved in specific interventions as well as with these students’ families. In particular, in September 2017, the Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs indicated 42 primary schools in Greece where social workers will provide their services for the school year 2017–2018.19 The Ministerial Decision does not name the Roma as the group targeted exclusively by this intervention but refers to the need to support socially vulnerable groups in general. However, the 42 schools enlisted in the Ministerial Decision are situated in areas with high rates of Roma population (such as Agia Varvara, Zefyri, AnoLiosia in Athens, Sofades in Karditsa, Kato Achaia near Patras).

17

Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs (2013). Ministerial Decision (2), 2996/2013, No. 172435/Γ7/13-11-2013/ΥΠΑΙΘ. Οργάνωση και Λϵιτουργία της Πρόσθϵτης Διδακτικής Στήριξης 2013–2014 [Organisation and Implementation of supplementary teaching support 2013–2014]. 18 Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017b). Decision no 142628/ ΓΔ4, JO 3032 (04.09.2017). Καθήκοντα και αρμοδιότητϵς των κλάδων ΠΕ23 Ψυχολόγων και ΠΕ30 Κοινωνικών Λϵιτουργών στα σχολϵία Πρωτοβάθμιας και Δϵυτϵροβάθμιας Γϵνικής και Επαγγϵλματικής ϵκπαίδϵυσης. [Duties and responsibilities of Psychologists (code 23) and Social Workers (code 30) working in primary education and general and vocational secondary education]. 19 Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017c). Decision No 144073/ Δ1, JO 3084 (06.09.2017). Καθορισμός σχολικών μονάδων τοποθέτησης Κοινωνικών Λϵιτουργών κλάδου ΠΕ30. [Assignment of Social Workers (code30) to specific school units.]

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    59

The Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion Although this section focuses on policies and measures related to education, the establishment of the Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion under the M­inistry of Labor, Social Security and Social Solidarity in 2016 should be noted.20 The Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion will (a) coordinate all policies regarding Roma’s integration; (b) cooperate with other Ministries, responsible institutions and stakeholders in order to conduct research about the Roma in Greece; (c) plan and implement any interventions related to Roma issues; (d) develop fully operational mapping and monitoring mechanisms regarding the Roma and relevant policies; (e) consult on and assess any interventions regarding the Roma; and (f) disseminate information about the Roma and relevant measures. The Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion will also be the national contact point for the implementation of the Roma integration strategies in Greece (from now on).

Examples of Roma’s Educational Success in Greece Some studies have started to examine contexts where the Roma have experienced some educational progression. For instance, in the UK context, aspects regarding the education of the Roma have been well-considered by researchers and policy-makers (e.g. in 2003, the Department for Education and Skills published the guide ‘Aiming High: Raising the Achievement of Gypsy Traveller Pupils. A Guide to Good Practice’). The implementation of some services, interventions and educational practices have appeared to be helpful for the Roma. For instance, the Traveller Education Services (TESs) help the engagement of Gypsy-Traveller communities with the education system (Bhopal, 2004) through securing Roma’s access to school places and offering appropriate support for individual families (Bhopal, 2011). In some cases, home education appeared a better and more suitable educational option than formal schooling to Gypsy and traveller parents (Bhopal & Myers, 2016; D’Arcy, 2014).21 Moreover, an emphasis has started to be given to Roma’s higher education participation. For example, between 2008 and 2015, the Roma Education Fund has supported 1,340 Roma university students per year (Brüggemann & Friedman, 2017). In addition, some researchers have started to conduct research on aspects related to Roma’s higher education participation. For instance, Abajo and Carrasco’s study investigated Roma’s educational success in Spain (2004, cited in Bereményi & Carrasco, 2015, p. 154), Kende (2007) examined cases 20

with the Law 4430/2016, JO 205 (31.10.2016), Article 42. Κοινωνική και Αλληλέγγυα Οικονομία και ανάπτυξη των ϕορέων της και άλλϵς διατάξϵις – Κϵϕάλαιο B′: Σύσταση Ειδικής Γραμματϵίας Ρομά [Social and Solidarity Economy and development of its institutions and other directives – Part B: The Establishment of Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion]. 21 Home education is provided as a legal educational alternative in England (D’Arcy, 2014), although it is subjected under scrutiny (Bhopal & Myers, 2015).

60    Panagiota Gkofa where Roma students were accessing university level education in Hungary and Hinton-Smith, Danvers and Jovanovic (2018) focused on Roma women’s higher education participation. Similarly to the above mentioned studies, Gkofa (2016) has undertaken research into the academically successful pathways of Roma in Greece. In contrast to the emphasis put by researchers dealing with Roma education in Greece on the high dropout rates and low achievement levels of this community, Gkofa’s (2016) study investigated the trajectories of twenty Roma who can be regarded as educationally ‘successful’ as they have all entered higher education. In her research, she deployed the term ‘educational success’ to shift from a deficit perspective focussing on issues such as Roma underachievement and early drop out to focus on Roma educational progression at a higher level. She took Roma entrance to higher education as a marker of educational success because higher education holds high symbolic value in the Greek context (Livanos, 2010). For many decades accessing higher education has been regarded as a level of upward social mobility (Sianou-Kyrgiou & Tsiplakides, 2011; Themelis, 2013). Her study mostly focussed on the factors involved in the 20 participants’ educational success. The analysis of their stories drew attention to the following key influences which they self-identified as contributing to their success: (a) influences of family/home, (b) influences of school, (c) influences of community, (d) influences of locality issues and (e) influences of individual and circumstantial issues. Mapping the factors which resulted in Roma’s educational success on the basis of the accounts of people who experienced it covers, to an extent, the gap in the existing literature about Roma’s educational success in Greece. Gkofa’s study also examined the perceptions, constructions and experiences of educational success of some Greek Roma who have entered higher education (for more see Gkofa, 2018), their identity descriptions (for more see Gkofa, 2017a) as well as the interventions the participants believe can challenge some of the economic, cultural, and associational injustices experienced by the Roma (for more see Gkofa, 2017b). These participants’ cases challenge stereotypes about Roma being uneducated or undervaluing education and could inform policy discussions about the possibilities for change and social transformation through education (Apple, 2008), aiming at boosting non-privileged students’ progression.

References Apple, M. (2008). Can schooling contribute to a more just society? Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 3(3), 239–261. Askouni, N. (2006). Η ϵκπαίδϵυση της μϵιονότητας στη Θράκη: από το πϵριθώριο στην προοπτική της κοινωνικής ένταξης. [The education of the (Muslim) minority in Thrace: From the margin to the prospect of inclusion.] Athens, Greece: Alexandreia. Bakker, P., Hübschmannová, M., Kalinin, V., Kenrick, D., Kyuchukov, H., Matras, Y., & Soravia, G. (2000). What is the Romani language? Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press. Bereményi, B. Á., & Carrasco, S. (2015). Interrupted aspirations: Research and policy on Gitano education in a time of recession, in Spain. Intercultural Education, 26(2), 1–12.

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    61 Bhopal, K. (2004). Gypsy Travellers and education: Changing needs and changing perceptions. British Journal of Educational Studies, 52(1), 47–64. Bhopal, K. (2011). ‘This is a school, it’s not a site’: Teachers’ attitudes towards Gypsy and Traveller pupils in schools in England, UK. British Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 465–483. Bhopal, K., & Myers, M. (2009). Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils in schools in the UK: Inclusion and ‘good practice’. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(3), 299–314. Bhopal, K., & Myers, M. (2016). Marginal groups in marginal times: Gypsy and Traveller parents and home education in England, UK. British Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 5–20. Brüggemann, C., & Friedman, E. (2017). The decade of Roma inclusion: Origins, actors, and legacies. European Education, 49(1), 1–9. doi:10.1080/10564934.2017.1290422 Chatzissavidis, S. (2007). Οι Ρομ στην ιστορία της ανθρωπότητας και στην Ελλάδα [The Roma in the history of humanity and Greece]. In Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs – The University of Thessaly (Εds), Ετερότητα στη Σχολική Τάξη και Διδασκαλία της Ελληνικής Γλώσσας και των Μαθηματικών: η περίπτωση των Τσιγγανοπαίδων, Πρόγραμμα: «Ένταξη Τσιγγανοπαίδων στο σχολείο», Επιμορφωτικός Οδηγός [Diversity in the Classroom and the Teaching of the Greek language and Mathematics: the case of Roma children, Programme `Inclusion of Gypsy children in school’, Training guide] (pp. 39–64). Volos. Retrieved from http://ikee.lib.auth.gr/record/265136?ln=el. Accessed on July 18, 2007 Chrysakis, M. (2004). Κοινωνικός και Εκπαιδϵυτικός Αποκλϵισμός. [Social and educational exclusion.] (Πανϵπιστημιακές Σημϵιώσϵις, [University Notes]). Patras, Greece: University of Patras Editions. Council of Europe. (2011). Study on “Combating the isolation of Roma women and girls and promoting their empowerment”. Invisible lives – Roma Women in Greece, Prepared by V. Antonopoulou, Steering Committee for Equality between Women and Men (CDEG). Damanakis, M. (2005). European and intercultural dimension in Greek education. European Educational Research Journal, 4(1), 79–88. D’Arcy, K. W. (2014). Travellers and home education: Safe spaces and inequality. London: Trentham and IOE Press. Department for Education and Skills (DfES). (2003). Aiming high: Raising the achievement of Gypsy Traveller pupils. A guide to good practice. London: DfES. Dragonas, T. (2012). Roma mothers and their young children. Country Report: Greece. Unpublished Report. Bernard Van Leer Foundation, Greece. Drydakis, N. (2012). Roma women in Athenian firms: Do they facewage bias? Ethnic and Racial Studies, 35(12), 2054–2074. European Commission. (2009). The Greek Roma issue: Spatial and social exclusion and integration policies (Peer Review Integrated Programme for the Social Inclusion of Roma) (Host Country Report). Retrieved from ///C:/Users/ user/Downloads/host_country_report_GR09%20(1).pdf. Accessed on May 5, 2012. European Commission. (2014). Report on the implementation of the EU framework for National Roma Integration Strategies. Retrieved from http://www.refworld.org/ docid/544a51ed4.html. Accessed on July 11, 2018. European Commission. (2016). Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States 2016. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/transpar ency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-424-EN-F1-1.PDF. Accessed on November 10, 2017. Eurybase – Οργάνωση του ϵκπαιδϵυτικού συστήματος στην Ελλάδα 2008/09. (2009). [Organisation of educational system in Greece 2008/2009]. Retrieved from http:// kesyp-ampel.att.sch.gr/greek_ed_syst_euridice_0809.pdf. Accessed on July 10, 2018.

62    Panagiota Gkofa Farkas, L. (2014). Report on discrimination of Roma children in education. Brussels: EU. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/roma_childdiscrimination_en.pdf. Accessed on April 15, 2015. Georgiadis, F., & Zisimos, A. (2012). Teacher training in Roma education in Greece: Intercultural and critical educational necessities. Issues in Educational Research, 22(1), 47–59. Giakoumaki, V. (2007). Η υιοθέτηση της «πολυπολιτισμικότητας»: Μια ϵισαγωγή στο θέμα των πολιτικών διαχϵίρισης της ϵτϵρότητας στη σύγχρονη ϵλληνική πραγματικότητα. [The adoption of ‘multiculturalism’: An introduction to the policies of diversity management in modern Greek reality.]. In Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs-The University of Thessaly (Eds.), Ετϵρότητα στη Σχολική Τάξη και Διδασκαλία της Ελληνικής Γλώσσας και των Μαθηματικών: η πϵρίπτωση των Τσιγγανοπαίδων, Πρόγραμμα: «Ένταξη Τσιγγανοπαίδων στο σχολϵίο», Επιμορϕωτικός Οδηγός [Diversity in the classroom and the teaching of the Greek language and mathematics: The case of Roma children, Program ‘Inclusion of Gypsy children in school’, Training guide] (pp. 11–22). Athens, Greece: Eptalofos. Gkofa, P. (2016). Greek Roma in higher education: A qualitative investigation of educational success. Ph.D. thesis, King’s College London, London. Gkofa, P. (2017a). Being Roma – Being Greek: Academically successful Greek Roma’s identity constructions. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(5), 624–635. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1191700 Gkofa, P. (2017b). Promoting social justice and enhancing educational success: Suggestions from twenty educationally successful Roma in Greece. The Urban Review, 49(3), 443–462, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-016-0393-6 Gkofa, P. (2018). Greek Roma in higher education: Perceptions and experiences of educational success. In R. Race (Eds.), Advancing multicultural dialogues in education (pp. 107–125). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Gotovos, A. (2002). Εκπαίδϵυση και Ετϵρότητα, Ζητήματα Διαπολιτισμικής Παιδαγωγικής. [Education and diversity, intercultural education issues.] Athens, Greece: Metaihmio. Gropas, R., & Triandafyllidou, A. (2011). Greek education policy and the challenge of migration: An ‘intercultural’ view of assimilation’. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 14(3), 399–419. Hatzinikolaou, A., & Mitakidou, S. (2005). Roma children: Building ‘Bridges’. In L. D. Soto & B. B. Swadener (Eds.), Power and voice in research with children (pp. 125– 135). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Hinton-Smith, T., Danvers, E., & Jovanovic, T. (2018). Roma women’s higher education participation: Whose responsibility? Gender and Education, 30(7), 811–828. DOI: 10.1080/09540253.2016.1274386. Karpozilos, C. (2004). Η ϵικόνα των Τσιγγάνων στον ημϵρήσιο Τύπο: Μια πρώτη προσέγγιση. [The image of the Roma in the daily press: A first approach.] Retrieved from http:// repository.edulll.gr/edulll/retrieve/1609/276.pdf. Accessed on May 12, 2018.

Kende A. (2007). Success stories? Roma university students overcoming social exclusion in Hungary. In H. Colley(Ed.), Social inclusion for young people: breaking down the barriers (pp. 133–144). Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Kostadinova, G. (2011). Minority rights as a normative framework for addressing the situation of Roma in Europe. Oxford Development Studies, 39(2), 163–183. Kostouli, T., & Mitakidou, S. (2009). Policies as top-down structures versus as lived realities: An investigation of literacy policies in Greek schools. In S. Mitakidou, E. Tressou, B. B. Swadener, & C. A. Grant (Eds.), Beyond pedagogies of exclusion in diverse childhood contexts: Transnational challenges (pp. 47–63). New York, NY: Macmillan. Kyuchukov, H. (2000). Transformative education for Roma (Gypsy) children: An insider’s view. Intercultural Education, 11(3), 273–280.

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    63 Labridis, E. (2004). Στϵρϵότυπο – Προκατάληψη- Κοινωνική Ταυτότητα: Μϵλϵτώντας τις δυναμικές της κοινωνικής αναπαράστασης για τους Τσιγγάνους. [Stereotype – Prejudice – Social identity: Examining the dynamics of social representation of the Gypsies.] Athens, Greece: Gutenberg. Lander, V. (2011). Coming from a traveller background: Gypsy, Roma and traveller children – Living on the margins. In G. Knowles & V. Lander (Eds.), Diversity, equality and achievement in education (pp. 97–110). London: Sage. Law 2413/1996, JO A124. Η ϵλληνική παιδϵία στο ϵξωτϵρικό, η διαπολιτισμική ϵκπαίδϵυση και άλλϵς διατάξϵις [Greek education abroad, intercultural education and other directives]. Law 3879/2010, JO A163 (2010, September 21), Articles 26 §1α and §1β. Ανάπτυξη της Διά Βίου Μάθησης και λοιπές διατάξϵις. [Development of Lifelong Learning and other directives.] Law 4430/2016, JO 205 (2016, October 31), article 42. Κοινωνική και Αλληλέγγυα Οικονομία και ανάπτυξη των ϕορέων της και άλλϵς διατάξϵις – Κϵϕάλαιο B′: Σύσταση Ειδικής Γραμματϵίας Ρομά. [Social and Solidarity Economy and development of its institutions and other directives – Part B: The Establishment of Special Secretariat for Roma Inclusion.] Lee, K. W., & Warren, W. G. (1991). Alternative education: Lessons from gypsy thought and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies, 39(3), 311–324. Levinson, M. P. (2008). Not just content, but style: Gypsy children traversing boundaries. Research in Comparative and International Education, 3(3), 235–249. Lidaki, A. (1997). Μπαλαμέ και Ρομά: Οι Τσιγγάνοι των Άνω Λιοσίων. [Balame and Roma: The Gypsies of Ano Liosia.] (3rd ed..). Athens, Greece: Kastaniotis. Livanos, I. (2010). The relationship between higher education and labor market in Greece: The weakest link? Higher Education, 60(5), 473–489. Lloyd, G., & McCluskey, G. (2008). Education and Gypsies/travellers: ‘Contradictions and significant silences’. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(4), 331–345. Lytra, V. (2007). Play frames and social identities: Contact encounters in a Greek primary school. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. Magka, A., & Mpempe, K. (2007). Εκπαίδϵυση παιδιών Ρομ. [Roma children’s education.] In E. Tressou & S. Mitakidou (Eds.), Μϵιονότητϵς μιλούν για την ϵκπαίδϵυση των παιδιών τους: Εκπαίδϵυση γλωσσικών μϵιονοτήτων [Minorities talk about their children’s education: Linguisti cminorities’ education] (pp. 99–106). Thessaloniki, Greece: Epikentro. Markou, G. (1993). Intercultural education in multicultural Greece. European Journal of Intercultural Studies, 4(3), 32–43. Markou, G. (1995). Εισαγωγή στη Διαπολιτισμική Εκπαίδϵυση: Ελληνική και Διϵθνής Εμπϵιρία (ΤόμοςΙ). [An introduction to intercultural education: Greek and international experience (Vol. I).] Athens, Greece: Center for Intercultural Education, University of Athens. Markou, G. (2008). Η προσπάθϵια ανάπτυξης μιας ϵθνικής πολιτικής για την οικονομική και κοινωνική ένταξη των Τσιγγάνων. [The attempt to develop a national policy for economic and social inclusion of the Roma.] In S. Trubeta (Ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ϵλληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσϵις – Αναιρέσϵις–Απουσίϵς [The Roma in the modern Greek state: Symbiosis – denegation – absence] (pp. 153–188). Athens, Greece: Kritiki. Matras, Y. (2002). Romani: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mavrommatis, G. (2008). Παιδιά Ρομά στο ϵλληνικό δημόσιο σχολϵίο. [Roma children in Greek public school.] In S. Trubeta (Ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ϵλληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσϵις – Αναιρέσϵις – Απουσίϵς [The Roma in the modern Greek state: Symbiosis – denegation – absence.] (pp. 199–223). Athens, Greece: Kritiki. Mavroyiorgos, G. (2014). Εκπαίδϵυση παιδιών Ρομά: Kατακϵρματισμένο πρόγραμμα. [Education of Roma children: A fragmented program.] Retrieved from http://tvxs.gr/ news/paideia/%C2%ABekpaideysi-paidion-roma%C2%BB-ena-katakermatismenoprogramma-toy-g-mayrogiorgoy. Accessed on July 8, 2018.

64    Panagiota Gkofa Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. (2008). Ministerial Circular (Αριθ. Πρωτ. 11684/Γ1/10.9.2008) ‘Εγγραϕή και ϕοίτηση Ρομά’ [Roma’s school enrolment and attendance]. Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. (2011). ‘Συνϵνώσϵις-Ιδρύσϵις σχολικών μονάδων Πρωτοβάθμιας και Δϵυτϵροβάθμιας Εκπαίδϵυσης για τη σχολική χρονιά 2011–2012’. [‘Primary and Secondary Schools’ Merging – Foundation for the school year 2011–2012’.] Retrieved from https://www.minedu.gov.gr/rss/8568-1303-11-synenoseis-idryseis-sxolikon-monadon-protobathmias-kai-deyterobathmias-­ ekpaideysis-gia-ti-sxoliki-xronia-2011-2012. Accessed on July 10, 2018. Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. (2013). Ministerial Decision (2), 2996/2013, No. 172435/Γ7/13-11-2013/ΥΠΑΙΘ. Οργάνωση και Λϵιτουργία της Πρόσθϵτης Διδακτικής Στήριξης 2013-2014. [Organisation and Implementation of supplementary teaching support 2013–2014.] Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs. (2016). Document “Οδηγίϵς και κατϵυθύνσϵις για την ίδρυση και λϵιτουργία Τάξϵων Υποδοχής (ΤΥ) ΖΕΠ για το σχολικό έτος 2016–2017 σϵ δημοτικά σχολϵία της χώρας”. [Guidelines for the esta-blishment and operation of the ZEP Reception Classes in Greek schools for the school year 2016–2017.] (Αρ.Πρωτ. 152029/Δ1/19-09-2016/ΥΠΑΙΘ, 7Ω764653ΠΣ-69Ε).

Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017a). Ministerial Decision 118066/Δ1/2017-ΦΕΚ 2639/2017/∆/28.07.2017 «Ένταξη Σχολικών Μονάδων Πρωτοβάθμιας Εκπαίδευσης στις Ζώνες Εκπαιδευτικής Προτεραιότητας (ΖΕΠ), όπου δύνανται να λειτουργήσουν Τάξεις Υποδοχής ΖΕΠ» [Inclusion of primary schools into the Zones of Educational Priority where Reception Classes can operate]. Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017b). Decision no 142628/ ΓΔ4, JO 3032 (04.09.2017). Καθήκοντα και αρμοδιότητες των κλάδων ΠΕ23 Ψυχολόγων και ΠΕ30 Κοινωνικών Λειτουργών στα σχολεία Πρωτοβάθμιας και Δευτεροβάθμιας Γενικής και Επαγγελματικής εκπαίδευσης. [Duties and responsibilities of Psychologists (code 23) and Social Workers (code 30) working in primary education and general and vocational secondary education]. Ministry of Education, Research and Religious Affairs (2017c). Decision No 144073/Δ1, JO 3084 (06.09.2017). Καθορισμός σχολικών μονάδων τοποθέτησης Κοινωνικών Λειτουργών κλάδου ΠΕ30. [Assignment of Social Workers (code30) to specific school units].

Miskovic, M. (2013). Roma education in Europe: Practices, policies and politics, Introduction (pp. 1–11). New York, NY: Routledge. Mitakidou, S., & Tressou, E. (2007). Να σου πω ϵγώ πώς θα μάθουν γράμματα: Τσιγγάνϵς μιλούν για την ϵκπαίδϵυση των παιδιών τους. [Let me tell you how they will learn: Gypsy women talk about their children’s education.] Athens, Greece: Kleidoskopio. Moucheli, A. (1996). Τσιγγάνοι και ΚοινωνικόςΑποκλϵισμός [Gypsies and social exclusion]. In D. Karantinos, L. Maratou-Alipranti, & E. Fronimou (Eds.), Διαστάσϵις του Κοινωνικού Αποκλϵισμού στην Ελλάδα, Κύρια θέματα και προσδιορισμός προτϵραιοτήτων πολιτικής [Dimensions of Social Exclusion in Greece, Basic issues and determination of policy priorities] (Report) Volume Α′ (pp. 491–523). Athens, Greece: Ethniko Kentro Koinonikon Erevnon. New, W. (2013). Litigating exclusion, inclusion and separation: Dilemmas of justice in Roma education reform. In M. Miskovic (Ed.), Roma education in Europe: Practices, policies and politics (pp. 181–191). New York, NY: Routledge. Nikolaou, G. (2005). Διαπολιτισμική Διδακτική: Το νέο πϵριβάλλον – Βασικές αρχές. [Intercultural didactics: The new environment – Basic principles.] Athens, Greece: Ellhnika Grammata.

Lifelong Learning for Roma in European Countries    65 Nikolaou, G. (2009). Teacher training on Roma education in Greece: A discussion about the results of INSETRom experience in two Greek schools. Intercultural Education, 20(6), 549–557. O’Hanlon, C., & Holmes, P. (2004). The education of Gypsy and Traveller Children: Towards inclusion and educational achievement. Sterling: Trentham Books. Okely, J. (1983). The traveller-gypsies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Palaiologou, N., & Faas, D. (2012). How ‘intercultural’ is education in Greece? Insights from policymakers and educators. Compare, 42(4), 563–584. Parthenis, C., & Fragoulis, G. (2016). “Otherness” as threat: Social and educational exclusion of Roma people in Greece. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 18(2), 39–57. Presidential Decree 462/1991, JO 171. Αξιολόγηση και ϵνισχυτική διδασκαλία μαθητών Δημοτικού Σχολϵίου. [Assessment and in-school remedial tutoring of primary school pupils.] Article 5. Ενισχυτική διδασκαλία [Remedial Tutoring]. Sardelić, J. (2017). No child left behind in the European Union? The position of Romani children. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 39(1), 140–147, DOI:10.1080/ 09649069.2017.1291554 Sianou-Kyrgiou, E., & Tsiplakides, I. (2011). Similar performance, but different choices: Social class and higher education choice in Greece. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 89–102. Skourtou, E. (2016). The education of Roma children. [Η ϵκπαίδϵυση των παιδιών Ρομά]. Retrieved from https://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/PRIMEDU390/ roma8.pdf. Accessed on November 25, 2017. Smith, T. (1997). Recognising difference: The Romani ‘Gypsy’ child socialisation and education process. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18(2), 243–256. Symeou, L., Luciak, M., & Gobbo, F. (2009). Teacher training for Roma inclusion: Implementation, outcomes and reflections of the INSETRom project. Intercultural Education, 20(6), 493–496. Terzopoulou, M., & Georgiou, G. (1996). Οι Τσιγγάνοι στην Ελλάδα, Ιστορία – Πολιτισμός. [The Gypsies in Greece, history – Culture]. Athens, Greece: Ministry of Education, GGLE. Themelis, S. (2009a). Questioning inclusion: The education of Roma/Traveller students and young people in Europe and England – A critical examination. Research in Comparative and International Education, 4(3), 262–275. Themelis, S. (2009b). Social mobility and education: A mixed methods study of a Roma and non-Roma community in the North West of Greece. Ph.D. thesis, IOE, London. Themelis, S. (2013). Social change and education in Greece: A study in class struggle dynamics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Triantafyllidou, A. (2012). Accept pluralism: Addressing cultural, ethnic & religious diversity challenges in Europe. A comparative overview of 15 European countries. 2011/02, Overview National Discourses, Comparative Country Report. ACCEPT PLURALISM Research Project, Tolerance, Pluralism and Social Cohesion: Responding to the Challenges of the 21st Century in Europe, European University Institute. Retrieved from http://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/19254. Accessed on June 21, 2018. Trubeta, S. (2001). Κατασκϵυάζοντας ταυτότητϵς για τους μουσουλμάνους της Θράκης. Το παράδϵιγμα των Πομάκων και των Τσιγγάνων. [Constructing identities for the Muslims of Thrace. The case of Pomaks and Roma/Gypsies.]. Athens, Greece: Kritiki. Trubeta, S. (2008). Εισαγωγή: Η αναζήτηση των Ρομά στις υποσημϵιώσϵις της Ιστορίας και στα πρωτοσέλιδα της Πολιτικής. [Introduction: Searching the Roma in the footnotes of history and the headlines of politics]. In S. Trubeta (Ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ϵλληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσϵις – Αναιρέσϵις – Απουσίϵς [The Roma in the modern Greek state: Symbiosis – denegation – absence] (pp. 11–76). Athens, Greece: Kritiki.

66    Panagiota Gkofa Tsitselikis, K. (2006). Citizenship in Greece: Present challenges for future changes. In D. Kalekin-Fishman, & P. Ptkänen (Eds.), Multiple citizenship as a challenge to European Nation States (pp. 145–170). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Varnava-Skoura, G., Vergidis, D., & Kassimi, C. (2012). Greece: On mechanisms and successive programs between support and innovation. In M. Demeuse, D. Frandji, D. Greger, & J. Y. Rochex (Eds.), Educational policies and inequalities in Europe (pp. 127–154). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Vaxevanoglou, A. (2001). Έλληνϵς Τσιγγάνοι: Πϵριθωριακοί και Οικογϵνϵιάρχϵς. [Greek Gypsies: Marginalised people and Family men.] (A. Gotovos, Introduction). Athens, Greece: Alexandreia. Vergidis, D. (1995). Νϵορατσισμός και σχολϵίο – η πϵρίπτωση των τσιγγανοπαίδων– [Εισήγηση στο 7ο Εκπαιδϵυτικό Συνέδριο της Σ.Ε. (1,2,3-12-1994) μϵ θέμα: «Η βία στο σχολικό χώρο»]. [Neo-racism and school – The case of Roma children – Presentation at the 7th Congress of Education S.E. (1,2,3-12-1994) on ‘Violence in the school’.] Sighroni Ekpaideusi, 81, 51–62. Zachos, D. (2011). Sedentary Roma (Gypsies): The case of Serres (Greece). Romani Studies, 21(1), 23–56. Ziomas, D., Bouzas, N., & Spyropoulou, N. (2011). Greece-promoting the social inclusion of Roma: A study of national policies. Institute of Social Policy – National Centre for Social Research – EKKE. Retrieved from ///C:/Users/user/Downloads/EL_second_network_report_11%20(3).pdf. Accessed on 26, 2017).

Chapter 4

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children in Italy: Pathways to School Inclusion Valeria Cavioni Abstract In this chapter, the author describes the education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti (RSC) children in Italy focussing on possible pathways to school inclusion. According to available national reports, there are about 140,000 RSC people living in Italy, who the author calls a ‘hidden minority’. The author provides detailed information on their ethnic origins and traditions, describes their legal and social situation, culture and language. Then the author outlines the attainment of RSC in the Italian education system and the most important policies to support their successful education. In conclusion, the author presents selected programmes to promote social inclusion and education of RSC children. Keywords: Italy; Roma, Sinti and Caminanti people; social inclusion; school inclusion; attainment; education

Introduction Italy is historically recognised as a country of emigrates. However, Italy became a country of migration for many populations especially those coming from European countries, after the fall of Communism (Bonifazi, 2000). From the late 1970s to early 1990s, migrants came mainly from Central and Eastern Europe countries such as Romania and Bulgaria, who needed political asylum in order to acquire legal residence and a job (Matras, 2000; Reyniers, 2008). The term ‘Roma’ is an umbrella term that refers to a widespread range of ethnic groups that share a number of similarities such life habits, traditions, knowledge, family organisations, beliefs and

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 67–93 Copyright © 2020 by Valeria Cavioni Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191009

68    Valeria Cavioni migration processes but also it is characterised by a heterogeneity in languages, dialects and religions that refers to specific different cultural traditions. In Italy, the ‘nomadic’ population includes three main ethnical groups Roma, Sinti and Caminanti (RSC). There are no fully reliable data related to the number of RSC populations in Italy, their level of education, employment, life expectancy and child mortality, housing and unemployment rates, the percentage of foreigners and stateless persons, the access to social, health and welfare services due missing knowledge coming from censuses (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). According to available national reports, there are about 140,000 RSC individuals, ranging between 110,000 and 170,000, in Italy (Senato della Repubblica, 2011; Strati, 2011), of which about 50% have Italian citizenship. The remaining 50% without Italian citizenship are in one of the following conditions (Ministero dell’Interno, 2006): ⦁⦁ coming from other EU countries; ⦁⦁ non-European citizens; ⦁⦁ foreigners who have been granted the right of asylum or residence permit for

humanitarian reasons;

⦁⦁ stateless: born in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, with documents

that, after the dissolution of Yugoslavia, were not accepted or due the destruction of population registers in many cities of Bosnia; ⦁⦁ individuals who are born in Italy from stateless persons (mostly from the former Yugoslavia countries); and ⦁⦁ illegal or irregular stay, without any residence permit. The final number of the illegal immigrants has not been officially estimated (Calabrò, 2008) even though the Prefecture of Rome found about 13,000 irregular Roma in about 20 unauthorised camps in the city of Rome (Ufficio Nazionale Antidiscriminazioni Razziali (UNAR, 2012). The RSC population, despite being the largest migrant community in the country, amounts to only 0.23% of the general Italian population. Although most of them have been established in specific areas in the Italian territory for a long time and they are sedentary, they are still widely considered by the Italian people as a ‘nomadic population’. Fig. 4.1 shows RSC population distribution in Italy.

The Hidden Minority Roma people are the largest minority in Central-Eastern Europe and at the same time the most disadvantaged due to poverty, lack of education and resources and a proper ‘motherland’ or territory which protects their interests and rights. The general concept of minority in Italy is connected to the linguistic aspect of a minority group. The Italian Constitution recognises and protects 12 specific linguistic minorities1 based on the criteria of territoriality. The RSC population,

1

Catalan, Greek, Slovenian, Croatian, French, French-speaking, Occitan, German and similar languages, Sardinian, Rhaeto-Romance languages (Ladin and Friulian).

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    69

Fig. 4.1:  Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Populations Prevalence in Italy. Source: Authors’ Own Construction. as a ‘widespread minority’, lacking a fixed territorial concentration and belonging, is not recognised as a linguistic minority. The procedure to recognise the RSC as a minority group was launched in 2016 and it is still ongoing (Consiglio Regionale della Calabria, 2016; Il Quotidiano Italiano, 2016). Actually, in Italy, RSC people have only rights as individuals and not as a minority. The following sections provide detailed information on ethnic origins and traditions of RSC people (Panorama, 2008; Rai Regione Sicilia, 1989).

Roma Roma populations are mainly based in camps in North Italy with a very large presence of third-generation immigrants born in Italy (Impagliazzo, 2008). The names of the Roma subgroups are related to the Italian Regions where they settled down such as Roma Abruzzesi for those who came in the Abruzzo Region and Roma Molisani for those who established themselves in the Molise Region. The first migratory wave of Roma can be dated back to fourteenth century when populations coming mainly from the Balkans (including the former Yugoslavia countries, Bulgaria, Romania and Albania) moved to the south of Italy. The largest communities of Roma initially established themselves in the Regions of Abruzzo and Molise and are still settled mainly in Southern Italy (in Abruzzo, Molise, Campania, Puglia and Lazio); some small groups moved later to Northern and

70    Valeria Cavioni Central Italy in the Regions of Alto Adige, Veneto, Lombardy, Emilia Romagna, Tuscany, Umbria and Marche. The Abruzzesi and Molisani are mainly sedentary and engaged in horse breeders and trading. This group is the most traditional group speaking Romanesque (or Romani) mixed with local dialects. The end of slavery in Romania at the end of the 1800 and the collapse of the Habsburg Empire determined the migration of the Roma Vlah, composed of the Kalderasha (with sub-groups Chukuresti, Doresti and Zurkaja), the Roma Churara from former Yugoslavia Romania and Hungary and the Roma Lovara from Macedonia, Hungary, Sweden and Poland (Strati, 2011; Taddeo, 2008). They settled down in all Italian regions, except for Molise and Basilicata. The Kalderasha worked traditionally with door-to-door activities offering several services namely metal repair, polishing or producing metal items or other goods and palmistry (mainly women). They are presently involved in retail trade at local fairs, as well as buying and selling old iron and old clothes (Strati, 2011). Between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, a new migratory wave, especially after the two World Wars, determined the migration of about 7,000 Roma, mainly coming from Balkan areas, in particular, those coming from ethnic subgroups: Harvati, Kalderasha and Istrian. The Roma Harvati, with subcommunities Slovensko and Hrvatsko coming from Croatia, Istria and Slovenia, established themselves in the Friuli Venezia Giulia, Veneto, Lombardy and Liguria Regions. These groups of Roma are still actually settled in those regions, living in caravans or shacks and mainly practising breeding and horse trading, dealing with scrap-metal and ­second-hand cars. During the second post-war period, industrialisation and mechanisation of agriculture in the Center-North and North-East Italy forced Roma communities, living mainly in agricultural areas, to move to medium and large cities. The period between the 1960s and 1970 was characterised by a number of migration waves. A small population of Roma Kaulja coming from Algeria migrated to Italy and other groups of Roma Hrvatsko moved to other Regions in Northern and Central Italy after the Second World War (UNAR, 2012). Another group composed by about 40,000 of Roma Xoraxanè (Muslims from the former Yugoslavia), Roma Arlija/Siptaira (from Kosovo and Macedonia), and Roma Romani, reached Italy. Furthermore, the Roma Khorakhanè (with sub-groups Cergarija Vlasenicaqi, Cergarija Crna Gora, Rudasha, Gambasha, Shiftarija, Mangiuppi, Ka-loperija and Arlija) coming from Former Yugoslavia countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Macedonia and Kosovo) arrived in Italy and they established themselves in all Italian Regions, but mostly in the North (in Lombardy, mainly around the city of Brescia) and Central Italy. Other communities of Roma called Dasikhanè (subgroups: Kanjaria, Rudari, Mrznarija, Busniarija, Bulgarija, Gurbeti and Bankulesti) principally coming from Serbia, Kosovo and Bulgaria are located mainly in the north and centre of Italy with small groups also in Campania and Sicilia Regions. Additionally, there are subgroups of Roma Lovara from Poland, Romanian Roma from Romania and Roma Kaulija who emigrated from Algeria are established in all Italian Regions. The last migratory waves, started in the mid-1990s (mostly between 1991 and 1993) after the fall of Communist regimes in Eastern European countries, the

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    71 collapse of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Soviet Union and the enlargement of the European Union to the East that contributed to increase migration of Roma populations coming from Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Kosovo and Montenegro. From 1992 to 2000, an estimated number of about 16,000 Roma arrived mainly from Albania and Romania. Actually, there are about 30–40,000 Romanian Roma in Italy (National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations, 2012). Other groups of Muslim Roma coming from Kosovo are also based in Italy: the Arlija, the Kaloperja, the Giambasha and the Shiftari. The arrival of Roma in Italy from Romania was mentioned in various media campaigns labelling this phenomenon as the ‘invasion of Roma from Romania’. This contributed to fuel discrimination and integration of Romanian Roma into the Italian society. From this last migration, several Roma subcommunities were established in Southern Regions of Italy such as the Napulengre, the Celentani, the Pugliesi and the Calabresi. The Napulengre group is based in the city of Naples, in the Campagna Region. A large group is currently based in Scampia (an area of Naples), where there are over 1,500 Roma coming from the former Yugoslavia. During the 1970s they were mainly engaged in the manufacture of fishing gear, travelling shows with ponies, training of parrots and in palmistry. Some of them still practice traditional occupations (Strati, 2011). The origin of this community is probably from Spain. The Celentani, probably emigrated from Greece, are actually based in the Southern part of the Province of Salerno, mainly in the city of Eboli in the Campagna Region. Traditionally, they were involved in the streetside repair of agricultural tools. Actually, they are well integrated into the local economy and have high education attainments such as university degrees. The Pugliesi communities, in Puglia Region, used to work in farms, in horse-farming, as horse-butchers, or are involved in soap and metal utensils production, and in seasonal agricultural work. Actually, they are moderately integrated in the local economy, but with low living standards. The Calabresi populations, established in the Calabria Region, are one of the poorest Roma communities, with more than 1,500 people living without proper housing conditions. Traditionally, they were blacksmiths and horsedealers and horse breeders. Nowadays, they are involved in scrap metal activities or work in social cooperatives. Immigration in Italy is still ongoing due to the recent entry of some Eastern Countries into the European Union. The most recent migrations involved the Roma population of the Khorakhané (with Muslim religion), the Roma Dassikané (called also Gagikané, with Serbian origins and Orthodox religion) which includes different subgroups such as Kanjarja, Mrzenarja, Gurbeti and the Rudari (already in Italy from the 1960s and mainly Romanian speaking) with Romanian origins but coming from Serbia (Senato della Repubblica, 2011).

Sinti The Sinti, also called Sinti Giostrai (‘fair-ground folk’) are one of the oldest nomadic communities in Italy. They worked traditionally as horse trainers, carnies, artists and performers in parks and circuses. Nowadays they increase their economic resources with small crafts activities (wooden and wicker objects, repairing

72    Valeria Cavioni umbrellas or chairs, stuffing, sharpening knives, etc.) and door to door trade. Historical research has not yet determined the date of arrival of the Sinti in Italy with certainty, except for those who arrived from Prussian and Austrian Regions during the fifteenth century, established mainly in Piedmont (called Sinti Piemontesi), Lombardy (named Sinti Lombardi), Emilia Romagna (Sinti Emi-liani), Sardinia, Veneto (Sinti Veneti) and another community of Sinti named Valstiké established in Emilia Romagna and Piedmont. After the two world wars, other communities arrived and settled down in the Northern and Central Italian regions such as Sinti Gàckane, coming from Germany through France, Sinti Estrekhària from Austria, Sinti Kranària from Carnia (former Austrian Region) and Sinti Krasària from Carso. There are actually about 30,000 Sinti mostly based in specific areas across Italy (UNAR, 2012). In Northern Italy, Sinti are based in the Regions of Piedmont, Lombardy and Emilia Romagna. Subgroups of Sinti Gàckane, Sinti Estrekhària and Sinti Kranària settled down in Northern Italy (in Trentino-Alto Adige and Friuli Venezia Giulia Regions), in Central Italy (mainly in Marche and Umbria Regions) and the south of Italy (Lazio and Sardinia Regions) working as carnies, scavengers or bonsai seller. In the last 20 years, an increase of sedentary groups including Sinti occurred, due to various reasons namely difficulties, especially among women, related to housing situation of lacking water and electricity. The sedentary life was facilitated by the possibility of renting small agricultural land on which houses could be built and trade developed (Ministero dell’Interno, 2006).

Caminanti The origin of the Caminanti community is still uncertain and there are different hypothesis related to their origins: they may be descendants of the survivors of the Val di Noto earthquake during 1693 or they are descents from Sicilian Roma slaves arrived in Sicily at the end of the third century after the end of slavery (Rizza, 1992). The communities are mainly located in Sicily, even though small groups are established in other parts of Italy namely in Lombardy, Lazio and Campania Regions. Actually, there is a large heterogenous community in Sicily which is composed of 2,500 individuals in the city of Noto (Sicily) from over 60 years ago with different ethnic and cultural origins including Hungarian Rumungers, Swedish Tattaren, Polish Bergitka, German Sinti-Gackanè, English Gypsies, Kalé Spaniards (Di Pietro, 2009). The traditional language, called ‘Baccagghiu’ is gradually disappearing, and it close to being replaced by the local Sicilian dialect and Italian. The Caminanti still keep the traditional familiar organisation, under the guidance of the oldest members and with established marriages within the community. They are nomads and semi-nomads travelling across Sicily and all over the Italian territory. The Caminanti used to spend most of the winter time at home without travelling, while in the remaining months they travel to various places in Italy with caravans, towing cars or campers. In the past, they used to be knife grinders, umbrella repairers and sellers of balloons and carnies. Nowadays, they are still involved in some traditional activities such as knife-grinding, maintaining gas cookers, repairing, making and selling umbrellas or they work as street retailers and in seasonal agricultural works.

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    73

Excluded to be Included: The Social Situation They are thieves, they are dirty, they are lazy, they do not want to integrate into the mainstream culture, they kidnap children (SMILE, 2013, p. 10). Two out of the five Romani settlements in the area were burnt to the ground. Several overexcited residents watched the events from the windows of the apartment blocks surrounding the encampments, shouting and clapping their hands. (Sigona, 2005, p. 742) The RSC population represent ‘the last of the last’, victims of poverty, xenophobia, racism and the prejudicial tendency, and, from the public opinion, their image is binded to any form of deviance and crime. (National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations, 2012; Strati, 2011). Their communities are placed on the margins of society. They are mainly situated in camps outside of city centres characterised by poverty, socio-environmental deprivation, lack of health, and physical integrity. This situation strengths segregation, ghettoisation and hinders any form of inclusion process. The process to acquire Italian citizenship represents another main obstacle to formal inclusion as Italian citizens. To acquire Italian citizenship for those who were born and lived in Italy, but have non-Italian parents, is a complex process that requires reaching the eighteenth year of age and providing documentation which attests to the continuous residence for all 18 years on Italian territory. The lack of documentation exacerbates social fragility of these populations. Moreover, the constant threat of expulsion for those without a residence permit, the difficulties to access to basic citizenship services, such as social and health services, interfere with social inclusion and health promotion.

Housing and Health Conditions Historically, the wooden caravan or the horseshoe wagon constituted the most common type of habitation of the RSC families until the 1950s. Nowadays, horses have been replaced by cars and the tents, wagons or caravans from the roulottes, which offer a more comfortable environment. Additionally, the social and economic transformations of the last century have led to a drastic reduction of many of the activities that support nomadism. Today, not more than 2–3% of RSC families are still nomadic and even lower is the percentage of those who still use tents. Many Sinti families have been living in the same place for a long time; even among those Roma populations coming during the recent migration flows, there is a large number of those who have been stable in a specific area for more than 20 years. Due to the transformation of the Italian economy from agricultural to industrial, RSC communities have been forced to abandon or change traditional jobs and their conventional trade routes to get closer to big cities that could offer more resources and services. The concentration of these population has gradually been limited in specific areas (called ‘nomadic camps’ or ‘Roma camps’) controlled by local authorities. The worst situation is observed in illegal camps due to overpopulation, lack of water and electricity and housing situation where families live in shacks made of wood, sheets, cardboard (Mastinu, 1994). The creation

74    Valeria Cavioni of the so-called ‘Roma camps’ was initially designed as a temporary solution to cope with the urgent housing needs of those coming from the former Yugoslavia Countries. This strategy was adopted as a local policy supported at a regional level even in areas without basic facilities leading to ‘2–3 generations of Roma/ Gypsies being essentially born and living in places not very dissimilar to dump’ (Piasere, 2004, p. 86). The process of being settled in an authorised camp included that families received a housing unit which was leasefree for a renewable period of two years under the agreement of respecting specific rules also related to the restriction of fundamental rights such as family life and privacy. Some rules included, for instance, that visitors were usually only admitted into the camp from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. and in case of breaking the rules, the administration could decide the immediate expulsion (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). The housing situation is one of the most serious problems as the majority of people live in unstable conditions, in overcrowded houses, temporary barracks, mobile homes, caravans or other unstructured solutions (Tarnovschi, 2012). The locations of the settlements are unhealthy, risky and polluted areas that may aggravate health conditions and are without adequate access to basic public services such as water, electricity, sanitary facilities, gas and mandatory Education for children (FRA – European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2009). Only a smaller part of Italian RSC families live in single-family houses or condominiums. Camps are often located far away from the city centres and primary services, usually bounded by fencing with video surveillance and input control systems (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2015). Spatial isolation turns into social isolation fostering spatial segregation of its inhabitants from the rest of the population (Tarnovschi, 2012). The living conditions in these settlements are strongly below sanitary standards and the life expectancy of these people is 10 years or 20 less than the average Italian population (Agi.it, 2017). A recent report (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2015) stated a number of about 35,000 Roma individuals are experiencing emergency housing conditions, mostly monoethnic shanty towns managed by local public institutions. The majority are located in the Regions of Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, Lazio, Campania, for a total of 145 formal settlements where more than half of its population is composed of minors. According to a recent national study, these initiatives were marked by an emergency approach and a low level of integration and coordination between institutional bodies from health and social sectors (Strati, 2011). In the city of Rome, forced evictions have been carried out over the past 10 years by the local authorities without due process or provision of adequate alternative housing while placing families in a condition of severe vulnerability. Human rights violations, destruction of personal property, loss of personal assets, abrupt interruption of social relations and limitated the access to public services and education were the most severe consequences (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2016b; Commissioner for human rights, 2012). In the year 2015, 80 forced evictions were recorded in the city of Rome (+135% compared to 34 evictions during the year 2014) involving about 1,400 individuals including many women and children (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2015).

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    75

Situation of Children and Youth Particular concern needs to be given to the situation of youth due to the precarious living conditions of many RSC who are at risk of heightened exposure to crime from an early age. Offences most commonly attributed to RSC youth are related to thefts, scams and drugs due to poverty. For children living in formal or informal settlements, it means they are more likely to be born underweight, to be ill in general or have respiratory diseases or to be involved in cases of domestic accidents, poisoning or burns (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2016b). Roma children in Italy have an average life expectancy which is 10 years shorter than their nonRoma peers. The percentage of RSC children below the age of 16 is about 45% and it is three times higher than the national average for the same age group (15%) while the percentage of those over 60 among the RSC population (0.3%) is about one-tenth compared with of the national average (25%) for the same age group (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2016a; Croce Rossa Italiana, 2010; National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations, 2012; Strati, 2011). These statistics reinforce the hypothesis that their life expectancy is significantly below standard (De Luca, 2016). A recent report observed an overrepresentation of RSC children in childcare institutions where about 20% is composed of Roma children due to misapplication or subjective interpretation by social workers (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). The majority of these children spend their whole childhood in such institutions. Child labour within the Italian Roma community is reported to be 6% (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). Moreover, alcohol and substances abuse have been observed among adolescents as well as an increase in typical diseases brought by poverty such as tuberculosis, scabies, pediculosis and viral, mycotic and venereal infections among children. Additionally, early marriage represents one widespread practice among Roma populations coming mainly from Romania and Kosovo. This may have severe and negative impacts on the psychological, emotional and physical development of teenagers: educational paths are often interrupted, and healthy personal growth may be compromised during this delicate phase of life (Ministero dell’Interno, 2006).

Work Situation Even though no reliable data are available on the unemployment rate, working conditions remain a problematic issue due to the lack of professional qualification and social marginalisation (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). Until the 1960s about 30,000 Sinti in the Central Northern Italy were engaged in travelling shows such as circuses, while a similar number, in Center-South Italy, was primarily engaged in equine breeding, trade and metal working. The broad dissemination of television, cinema, discos and video games strongly reduced the success of circuses as a public entertainment show. Currently, less than 50% of Sinti lives on traditional ‘crafts’. Many traditional forms of work are close to extinction, such as repair of roller shutter and umbrellas, work of wrought iron and woodwork (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). Nowadays, work among RSC populations

76    Valeria Cavioni is associated with precarious and temporary jobs and low social security. A recent report emphasised that more the 70% of Roma people declared themselves as unemployed (Croce Rossa Italiana, 2010). Precariousness and misery are the constant conditions which obstruct participation in economic and social life. From this perspective, the only possibility of further gain is represented by beggary (Rossi, 2006). Another report estimated that only one out of ten Roma aged 20 to 64 has a paid job (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). A recent series of interviews among Roma adults (Tarnovschi, 2012) reported that most of the interviewed persons did not work in the last two years or they had just short periods of time of work. Furthermore, Roma women, according to the traditional model, tended to work less than men. Such high rates of unemployment, that is, four to five times higher among the non-Roma population, is caused by a number of reasons namely inadequate education, social discrimination and physical isolation and segregation in camps (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). Certain marginal sectors, such as recycling of used metals and batteries and the collection of small objects found in dumps, factories, and garbage caisters, which can be sold in local markets, are almost exclusively the prerogative of the RSC communities. RSC workers are also a part of the local agricultural labour force, especially in Southern Italy and in work related to the trade and processing of meat. Those who used to trade horses in the past, are also horse breeders today and many equestrian butchers are run by nomads (Ljudska univerza Kočevje, 2015). A recent report (Croce Rossa Italiana, 2010) identified that the most frequent work among men are related to metal works (such as peddlers) or to the recovery of different materials, or horse-trade or professions related to the circus show (jugglers, acrobats, dancers), street vending or markets or a number of small trade activities and seasonal agricultural jobs. Women are usually housewives or they work as domestic workers. Today, especially young RSC people, have desire to find employment as a resource to escape marginalisation and to engage in interactive socialisation (Salomoni, 2000). In recent years, Roma inclusion has become a primary social issue for the Council of Europe, the European Commission, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United Nations. In Italy the access to employment for RSC people was promoted as a Nation Strategy (Miscioscia, 2014; National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations, 2012).

Culture and Language Discrimination based on ethnic origin is seen as the most widespread form of discrimination in the European Union. In a recent comparative study (Tarnovschi, 2012), Italians showed the highest level of discrimination against Roma, compared with Bulgarian, Romanian and Spanish. It reported that 50% of Roma participants experienced discrimination, usually in relation to social interactions in public spaces, while looking for work, and while seeking services at health centres, hospitals, or social service offices. Furthermore, Roma women – both migrant and

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    77 native – felt more discriminated than men. The history of the RSC populations, marked by condemnations, marginalisation and persecutions, strengthened their sense of identity leading them to live ‘unconnected’, without creating significant relationships with the ‘outside’ society, in a sort of closure that helps them to protect and be faithful to their own traditions. Even in the new generations, there is pride in being different. The native Romanesque helps to maintain the different cultural origins of the RSC population. ‘Romanesque’ is a comprehensive term that includes a number of dialects coming from several European populations. This language, orally handed down, had its origins from the Neo-Indian languages such as Hindi and Sanskrit. Romanesque was enriched and influenced over the centuries with the vocabulary of the peoples with whom Roma populations have come into contact, namely the ancient Persian, Armenian, ancient Greek, Iranian, Slavic languages, Albanian, Hungarian, and Romanian fragmenting the original language into several dialects with a common background (Cagol, 1995; Spinelli, 2004). Persecution and segregation have contributed to the development of this language.

The Education of the RSC Children In Italy, the number of RSC children in school is a small minority compared with the total number of these children. The attention on their education is one of the main aims of the National Strategy for the Inclusion of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti (UNAR, 2012). No more than one-third of school-aged RSC minors are enroled in primary schools (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2015; European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). The access to formal school education is hindered by a combination of bureaucratic problems and poverty. The education of these children is frequently characterised by high absenteeism and early drop-out (Jordan, 2001). Precarious living conditions and frequent evictions of encampments are the main reasons for the school drop-out (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). Data suggested that 97% of these children do not complete the compulsory education period2 (Cagol, 1995). The number of Roma children not attending school is substantially higher compared to the general population: 11% by Roma, 3% by non-Roma (European Roma and Travellers Forum, 2015). According to a recent Governmental report, almost 20,000 of Roma children, under the age of twelve, mostly Romanians and from former Yugoslavia countries, overlook the school’s obligation while the others are in a situation of general educational retention of about three years (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). The data collected describe a comprehensive comparative study regarding the schooling experience of Roma, suggesting that a large proportion of the RSC population belong to the lowest educational groups, highlighting that a high percentage of their children do not attend school. Tarnovschi (2012) observed that 94.5% of a sample of Roma population reached the lowest grades of education (primary and lower secondary school), 5.2% reached a medium level (upper secondary education or

2

Education in Italy is compulsory from six to 16 years.

78    Valeria Cavioni post-secondary non-tertiary education) and only 0.5% have access to the highest level of education. The high illiteracy rate among adults (about 16% are not able to write and read) contribute to the perpetuation of their social exclusion and poverty (Kruczek-Steiger & Simmons, 2001). Additionally, data suggested that after the RSC children have learned to read, write and do maths, promoting further learning at school is very challenging due to school drop-out (Trentin, Monaci, De Lumèc, & Zanon, 2006). Recent research carried out by the Italian Red Cross in the city of Rome showed that 8% of the RSC populations concluded primary school, 23% reached a secondary education degree, 1% completed a five-year upper secondary diploma and only 0.3% obtained a five-year university degree. More than 40% do not complete any education level (Croce Rossa Italiana, 2010; Senato della Repubblica, 2011). Furthermore, since preschool is not included in compulsory education, children coming from low-income families do not attend it. They often start primary school without any preparation related school experience, routines and commitments. For these reasons, these children at school may show some similar patterns as children with learning difficulties. About 30–40% of Roma children are classified as learning disabled. They may have difficulties in recalling information, maintaining concentration, reading, writing and understanding a text; difficulties in translating into written text contents which were learned orally into written text, lack of lexical knowledge and difficulties in understanding grammar rules (Opera Nomadi, 2007). This may indicate an improper use of the school support assessment where learning delays due to frequent school absenteeism are considered to be learning difficulties.

Access to the Education System Obstacles and challenges to inclusion are triggered by the structure of the Italian educational system itself, prejudices related to the negative stereotypes of Roma population, but also to RSC populations mistrust and resistance towards the Italian school system (Carr & Klassen, 1997; Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993). Discrimination against these children in schools is an acute economic, political and social issue. The so-called ‘pathology of the ghetto’ (Zatta, 1994) defined a large number of causes that contribute to the poor attendance of the RSC pupils. Roma children often join the school when the school year has already started, and their attendance is discontinuous due to economic and practical obstacles to scholastic integration such as lack of school transportation, cost of materials, cultural beliefs and bureaucracy. School absenteeism, difficulties, and delays at school may be explained by a number of causes inside and outside the school (see Table 4.1). In particular, the roots of this poor schooling can be identified in familiar economic conditions related to the location of the accommodation: camps or barracks are usually situated on the outskirts, where the use of public services and infrastructures (such as bus and train to reach the schools) may be more challenging or too expensive. Roma parents declared that their children not attend school due to economic difficulties and also because of their unwillingness (Tarnovschi, 2012). Furthermore, the precariousness and inadequacy of housing negatively impact the possibility of caring for personal hygiene, thus affecting social relations with peers and adults at school.

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    79 Table 4.1:  Main Causes That May Interfere with Regular School Attendance in Italy. Social

Inadequate clothing. Insufficient school material. Lack of documents. Difficulties due to:   • disadvantaged housing conditions;   • illnesses;   • forced evictions.

Cultural

Beliefs towards mainstream society. Desire to protect ethnic and cultural identity. Lack of work perspective and future. Family economic activity (such as nomadic job).

School

Non-recognition of the educational value of the school. Lack of motivation and interest in school life. Difficulties interacting with teachers and peers due to different native language. Delays in Italian language development. No contents related to RSC culture in the school curriculum. Stigmatising from teachers and peers.

Source: Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per il Veneto (2002).

A number of studies described the cultural gap between RSC families and the school (Setti, 2015; Trentin et al., 2006). For instance, the RSC children belong to an oral culture not familiar with written texts and also family members mainly speak Romanesque. Italian is the second or third language. The work activity of parents may have an impact on school attendance. Children coming from families that are employed as carnies in fair-ground (‘Giostrai’) tend to drop-out of school due to parental work and the need of travelling. From the Roma point of view, the Italian school system tends to be considered as a symbol of a hostile society that forces cultural assimilation instead of valuing a plurality of ethnic identities (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). The school is not considered as an educational place because it is the symbol of the culture of the ‘majority society’ aimed to reproduce cultural values of the non-Roma (Setti, 2015). Since RSC children have a different cultural background, compared with the other students (non-Roma students), the school subjects are often considered not worthwhile with limited connection to everyday experiences gained in the family environment. School is experienced as a useless institution that does not provide adequate tools and knowledge for adult life. Furthermore, children’s education is usually considered to be the responsibility of the family. The Roma concept of learning processes is mainly based on learning by listening while the schools for

80    Valeria Cavioni the ‘Gage’ (non-Roma) are organised according to a rigid discipline of time and space (Trentin et al., 2006). On the opposite side, the mainstream Italian school system tends to ignore, devalue and reject the RSC culture (Jordan, 2001; Trentin et al., 2006). Italian families are likely to obstruct the presence of Roma children as well as other minorities because they are afraid that the quality of teaching may be negatively affected. At school, teachers are challenged by behavioural problems when children struggle to respect school time tables and schedules. RSC children tend to be considered hyperactive and undisciplined (Demetrio & Sbattella, 1987; Karpati, 1988). Teachers’ skills to promote inclusion and learning processes of Roma children may be another source of difficulties due to the lack of a specific teachers training curriculum on multicultural education (Trentin et al., 2006). Planning school curricula for RSC student requires knowing and considering the social, cultural and environmental situation of children in order to strengthen motivations, interests and school engagement (Dicati Barison, 2000). The learning processes and behaviours of children at school needed to be considered in light of this mismatch between attitudes, habits and beliefs encouraged by these two different cultural systems. In latest years a number of initiatives and programmes were carried out by the Italian institutions to support RSC populations and improve their living conditions in order to increase and facilitate access to adult education. Adult training programmes usually focus on teaching specific skills for work as well as civic education and Italian language, using the ‘learning by doing’ approach through labour market contracts called ‘form on the job’. Some examples of these programmes included an initial phase where workers were trained to provide cleaning and maintenance services within their settlements. Afterwards, selected individuals were involved in projects outside the camp. Another project also included the self-construction of housing for the RSC families.

Rights and Policies to Support Education The right to Education in Italy is recognised by a number of national and international laws. At the National level, the access to education for all children is guaranteed by Italian Constitution by Art. No. 34.: The school is open to all. Education […] is compulsory and free of charge. Capable and deserving individuals, even if without income, are entitled to reach the highest degrees of study. Foreign children can receive an education regardless of their social status. The school registration of foreign minors in Italian schools can be applied for at any time of the school year, even when children do not have any documents (ASGI, 2009). In 1991, Italy approved the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, issued in 1989 by the United Nations. The Convention explicitly refers to education as a universal right, highlighting that childrens’ rights needed to be protected regardless of any distinction of race, colour, sex, language, religion or politics of the child or his parents, their national, ethnic or social origin and their financial situation. Moreover, Protection of Roma was recognised by

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    81 the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948, ratified by Italy in 1955, together, in 2000, with the EU Race Equality Directive and the Employment Equality Directive. Another fundamental aspect to guarantee the right to education is to overcome discrimination, as was underlined, in 1956, in the article no. 5 of the International Convention: The States Parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights […]: the right to education and training. The mandatory nature of compulsory education, its accessibility and gratuity, is also emphasised by The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) issued by the United Nations General Assembly and applied in Italy in 1978. According to its Art. No. 13: The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree that Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedom. They further agree that education shall enable for all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance […]. Primary education shall be compulsory and available for free to all. Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who have not received or completed the whole period of their primary education (United Nations, 1967). The history of the national policies to support the education of the RSC population in Italy began in the late 1950s when the education of children was carried out by volunteers within nomadic camps. Children were enroled in special separated schools only for nomadic pupils. The main idea behind the creation of these special schools was that school’s time and schedule needed to adjust to the children’s nomadic life. During the 1960s, broad actions related to policies and educational programmes to ensure full schooling for RSC children started to be developed. In 1965 an agreement was signed by Opera Nomadi3 with the Ministry of Education and the Institute of Pedagogy of the University of Padua in order to create special classes, called ‘Lacio Drom’ (from Romani language ‘good trip’) for Roma and Sinti children. These classes were separated from the 3

Opera Nomadi is an association that promotes inclusion and the active participation of Roma, Sinti and other nomadic communities in social and political life in Italy. It aims to protect RSC rights, encouraging specific interventions to reduce social disadvantages, isolation, segregation, poverty and discrimination.

82    Valeria Cavioni mainstream classes within the same school building to encourage socialisation. Due to the opposition of local school officials and parents of the other pupils, Roma and Sinti children used to be ghettoised in unsuitable and isolated rooms. Teachers with a special training and specific skills were employed by the Ministry of Education. The Lacio Drom classes were primarily targeted to teach students to respect rules, keep order and take care of their hygiene. The main idea was that Roma children needed to be ‘reeducated’ to society (Miscioscia, 2014). During the 1980s Roma students were included in mainstream classes with special assistant teachers. Particular grants for the education of Roma and Sinti children were foreseen at the national level. A document titled ‘Schooling of Gypsies and Nomadic children in kindergarten, primary and first level of secondary school’ was issued by the Ministry of Education in order to raise awareness on Roma children rights, and to protect their cultural identity while promoting schooling and inclusion. The document stated that Gypsies and nomads are not considered handicapped, but rather socially disadvantaged. This disadvantageous condition is related to the very irregular frequency, to the transfers from one school to the other, to the widespread phenomenon of evasion linked to living conditions and beliefs of their culture. More effective schooling should first be based on an initial aptitude of full acceptance, followed by developing specific curriculum to fully meet Roma children needs considering a different cultural background to guarantee their learning. (Ufficio Scolastico Regionale Lazio, 1986, p. 2) A formal agreement titled ‘Protocollo d’intesa per la tutela dei minori zingari, nomadi e viaggianti’ (trad. ‘Memorandum of Understanding for the Protection of Gypsies, Nomads and Travelers’) was signed between the Ministry of Education and Opera Nomadi and aimed to tackle school drop-out for a period of three years, from 2005 to 2008. The document described guidelines for school offices and local authorities to face Roma and Sinti school drop-out, emphasising the key role of the cultural and linguistic mediator to create a bridge between Italian schools and RSC families. In 2007, a document titled ‘La via italiana per la scuola interculturale e l’integrazione degli alunni stranieri’ (trad. ‘The Italian Road for Intercultural School and the Integration of Foreign Students’) was issued by National Observatory for the Integration of Foreign Students and Intercultural Education of the Ministry of Education (Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, 2007). Strategies, recommendations and key principles were explained to promote a National model for the inclusion of children with different cultural backgrounds facing ‘Gypsyism’, prejudices and discrimination among Roma and Sinti groups (see Table 4.2). In 2008, Italy joined the European Network on Inclusion of RSC. Some Ministries, including the Ministry of Labor, signed a Memorandum of understanding to coordinate their activities. The Memorandum had two main objectives: carrying out a survey on the living and working conditions of the RSC populations

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    83 Table 4.2:  Key Principles to Promote a National Model for Inclusion in Italy. •  Universalism: recognition of the rights of children according to with the International Convention on the Rights of the Children adopted by the UN in 1989, signed by Italy in 1991. • Inclusive school: inclusion of foreign pupils in the mainstream classes. • The centrality of the person: enhancement of the person in his/her bi graphical uniqueness. • Interculturalism: valuing dialogue among different cultures for all pupils and at all school levels. Source: Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione (2007).

in order to elaborate initiatives to enhance their social inclusion and setting up a network to monitor the allocation of available resources and to create a national database. In 2010 The Ministry of Labor established a National Group for interinstitutional coordination for the integration of RSC populations and in 2011, Italy adopted the ‘EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020’ (European Commission, 2011) aimed to guide national policies to support inclusion initiatives. The Italian adaptation, titled ‘National Strategy for the inclusion of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Communities’ was issued by the Italian National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations with the collaboration of the Minister of Labor and Social Affairs, the Minister of Interior, the Minister of Health, the Minister of Education, University and Research, and the Minister of Justice aimed to promote effective inclusion processes of RSC communities in Italy (UNAR, 2012). The document highlighted the need for targeted policies, specifically related to access to employment, education, healthcare and housing. According to this EU Framework, Italy prioritised the social inclusion and integration of Roma national strategies allocating funding from national and European budgets, especially on education as a key policy area. In 2012, the Ministry of Education published school guidelines for children with special educational needs including children with socioeconomic, linguistic or cultural disadvantages in the category of ‘special need’ (MIUR, 2012). Consequently, Roma children were indirectly considered with special educational needs due to the frequent condition of social and cultural deprivation. In the last decades, several national initiatives such as school-based programmes, seminars, training courses, and conferences for teachers were carried out by the Ministry of Education and other national educational bodies to increase RSC children school access and attendance and their living conditions (Flc cgil, 2002). For the five-year period 2007–2013, 600 million of euros were ear-marked by the European Social Fund for the implementation of projects for social inclusion (Senato della Repubblica, 2011).

Programmes to Promote Social Inclusion and Education of Children ‘School is a hell where every day bits of the bad ideas you have on others are burned’ (Guarnieri, 2000). A number of projects to promote the inclusion and

84    Valeria Cavioni education of nomadic children have been carried out by local authorities, academic groups and associations. Following sections will be focussed on the description of recent national and international programmes to promote social inclusion and education of RSC pupils.

European Projects Some recent relevant European projects related to Roma and Sinti education were carried out in Italy. This section provides information related to four European projects that were carried out in Italy: ‘The education of the Gypsy childhood in Europe’ project, the INSETRom project, the SMILE project and the MATRIX project. ‘The education of the Gypsy childhood in Europe’4 was a three year project, founded by the CORDIS Community Research and Development Information Service and concluded in 2003. The project intended to provide an analysis of the education and socialisation processes of Gypsy/Roma children in Spain, France and Italy in order to promote social and educational interventions targeted for policy-makers, the academic community and European society (Giménez Adelantado, 2002). The INSETRom (Teachers Inservice Training for Roma Inclusion) project5 aimed to facilitate school and Roma family partnerships in order to establish an environment of collaboration and shared goals for children’s education. The project involved scholars with expertise in Roma education from Cyprus, Italy, Netherlands, Greece, Austria, Romania, United Kingdom and Slovakia. INSETRom was funded by the European Commission from 2007 to 2009. This project included a number of training modules to enhance teachers’ knowledge related to the culture and history of Roma, the most frequent prejudices and stereotypes against Roma populations and family–school relationships (Karagiorgi, Symeou, & Crozier, 2009). The ‘SMILE – Supporting Motivation to Intervene on Learning and Experience’ project6 was a two-year European Lifelong Learning Program targeting on the promotion of social inclusion of Roma with a comprehensive approach to support Roma students in establishing an educational community based on prosocial behaviours. The main goals of the project included: ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

4

increase awareness towards school drop-out of Roma children; create a positive learning environment for Roma children; increase awareness towards living conditions and health of Roma populations; reduce mutual prejudices between Roma and non-Roma population; and

For further information on the ‘The education of the Gypsy childhood in Europe’: http://cordis.europa.eu/publication/rcn/7300_en.html 5 For further information on the INSETRom project: http://www.iaie.org/insetrom/ 6 For further information on the SMILE project: http://www.romasmile.com/

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    85 ⦁⦁ activities for students carried out at school aimed to enhance social and emo-

tional competence and prosocial behaviours among Roma children.

The project incorporated modules for teachers as professional developments in order to provide innovative teaching methods on the following topics: multiculturalism education and information about socioeconomic aspects of working with Roma population as well as parental training courses of Roma children on children’s rights and needs, parenting, preventing social vulnerability, child development, cooperation with the school, aggressive behaviours and violence, hygienic and cultural habits. The SMILE project was implemented in six countries (Italy, Bulgaria, Belgium, Croatia and United Kingdom) from November 2013 to October 2015. The Italian piloting of the project was carried out in 2015 with a group of primary school teachers and it included 10 two-hour sessions, each with modules focussed on prosocial behaviour, Roma history, culture and language, Italian literacy, and preventive healthcare (SMILE, 2015). A list of recommendations to facilitate the inclusion and the school attendance of Roma children was also included as part of the main outcomes of the project (see Table 4.3). The Roma Matrix (Mutual Action Targeting Racism, Intolerance and Xenophobia) project was a two-year project co-funded by the European Union’s Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Program from 2013 to 2015. The project was aimed to develop actions at local, national and European levels to tackle discrimination towards Roma and promote inclusion (see Table 4.4). This project was one of the largest transnational cross-sector projects in Europe involving 20 partner organisations across 10 EU Member States including local and Regional authorities, Roma organisations, NGOs and universities. In Italy, the Bologna Municipality and the Emilia Romagna Region were included in the project (Migration Yorkshire, 2015). Table 4.3:  SMILE Project Recommendations for School Inclusion of Roma Pupils in Italy. • Ensuring an active involvement of Roma parents and family. • Involving institutions in the prosocial process. • Introducing Romani language, culture and traditions at school. • Promoting cultural sensitivity among teachers. • Implementing child-centred teaching approach. • Supporting the children’s school attendance. • Adapting any initiative to the Roma context. • Implementing a holistic approach. • Fostering the role of Roma mediators. Source: SMILE (2013) and Boldrini and Bracchini (2015).

86    Valeria Cavioni Table 4.4:  Key Areas of the Matrix Project in Italy. • Fostering mutual understanding through cross-community mediation, work with Roma and non-Roma children, female community health mediators, and employment programmes. • Countering stereotypes and raising awareness of racism through the promotion of positive images, public media campaigns, mentoring Roma in public authorities, and extensive networks. • Improving redress, reporting and support mechanisms for Roma experiencing racism and xenophobia through the establishment of reporting and care centres, and working with public authorities to improve redress mechanisms. • Understanding and analysing racism through research. Source: Migration Yorkshire (2016).

Projects Supported by Municipalities This section describes projects carried out on a local level in limited areas funded by the Municipalities of Rome (in the Region of Lazio) and Padua (in Veneto Region). The city of Rome has a comparatively high concentration of Roma and Sinti children living in unsanitary housing (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2016b). Starting from 1991, the Rome Municipality carried out a number of projects to increase the participation of Roma and Sinti pupils in formal education and improve their health working together with the Local Health Unit. The ‘Health without exclusion’ project was one of the first large projects aimed at providing basic health care assistance, health education and information to Roma and Sinti people in the Rome municipality. Between 2002 and 2015, Rome invested 27 million euros to improve the education of Roma children with the ‘Roma Schooling’ project, a broad initiative promoted by the City of Rome (Görgei, 2016). Findings on the impact of this project are still controversial. According to Italian Government reports, the project contributed to an increase in the percentage of children attendance and the number of those who took secondary school qualifications (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). On the contrary, other analyses from National and International NGOs stated that this project failed to bring any significant change: out of 1,800 Roma kids who were enroled in the project, only 198 got through at least three-fourths of the schooling process (Associazione 21 luglio, 2016a; Görgei, 2016). Another programme named ‘Diritto alla Scuola, Diritto al Futuro’ (trad. ‘Right to School, Right to the Future’) was also implemented by the Comunità di Sant’Egidio in Rome, a non-profit organisation that worked in association with local schools in Rome. The programme aimed to prevent and face school drop-out and to strengthen Roma pupils participation in school life increasing school attainment and school success This programme included the following steps: award scholarships for RSC students and their families as an incentive for fulfilling school obligations; implement extracurricular activities focussed on early literacy (for Roma children) and prosocial behaviours (for Roma and

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    87 non-Roma families); help Roma parents to understand the role of the school in child growth; involve families in local activities; promote cultural mediation interventions to counteract discrimination and promote collaboration between Roma and non-Roma residents in the same neighbourhood. Positive results were observed after two years: school attendance rates increase from 52% to 82% during the second year (Senato della Repubblica, 2011). Other projects which followed were implemented by Opera Nomadi to help drug-addicted Roma and Sinti populations. Another project, named ‘Sar San 2.0’ project7 (‘Sar San’ means ‘how are you?’ in Romanesque) was implemented in the periphery of the city of Rome. The project was created to promote the rights of Roma children and improve living conditions (see Table 4.5). This project had successful results increasing the school enrolment and attendance of Roma and Sinti children as well as helping a number of parents to strengthen their parenting skills (Associazione 21 Luglio, 2015). The city of Padua, in the North West Italy, established a specific social service public office named ‘Ufficio Nomadi’ (‘Office for Nomads’) targeted to offer support to Roma and Sinti families related to: economic difficulties; bureaucratic issues (such as residence permits, entry visas); vocational guidance and employment; educational and training opportunities in Padua; public services (namely in the Health and Safety sectors); coordination and collaboration with local social services intended for the Roma and Sinti communities. Several projects were implemented in the Padua Territory in 2001 to support early literacy, school attendance and vocational guidance of Roma children. School support and home support was offered to Roma and Sinti children and their families in order to strengthen homeschool partnership (Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per il Veneto, 2002). Additionally, free transport school services ware guaranteed for Roma and Sinti pupils. Table 4.5:  Main Targets of the Sar San 2.0 Project in Italy. • To help women and young mothers by providing legal, social and health support and to increase access to basic services for themselves and for their children. • To improve RSC parenting skills and to support parents to be able to help the learning processes of their children. • To promote inclusion of RSC children, encourage school enrolment and attendance of pupils, and to build collaborative relationships among teachers, school authorities and parents. • To implement school-based activities focussed on the development of cognitive, language, psycho-motor and expressive skills to enhance Roma and Sinti self-esteem, increasing positive relationships with classmates. Source: Adapted from https://sarsanblog.wordpress.com,

7

For further information on the ‘Sar San 2.0’ project: https://sarsanblog.wordpress.com/

88    Valeria Cavioni

Conclusions This chapter outlined the main obstacles to the inclusion of RSC children in the Italian school system, specifically related to their social and cultural exclusion, stigmatisation and school drop-out. The complex situation of the RSC communities in Italy is the result of a history of social and cultural challenges that progressed from exclusion and stigmatisation to inclusion and protection of their identity and rights. The social inclusion of the populations cannot be reached without inclusive education. Although efforts to improve the social status of RSC populations have been made in recent years and social and educational policies and reforms for their inclusion were promoted, the national education system and school policies stakeholders have still a key role in promoting the positive inclusion of these children. According to Trentin et al. (2006), the enrolment of RSC students requires flexible organisational models of the school curriculum in terms of contents, space, time, and methods of teaching. In this perspective the school curriculum needs to be: Multicultural: related to the promotion of the nomadic culture of RSC (such as the history, culture and languages of the various communities) and targeted to improve positive homeschool communication with the support of cultural and linguistic mediators. Intercultural: focussed on a pedagogical approach to foster RSC children’s education and learning (such as after-school programmes and the use of interactive, child-centred and peer to peer learning strategies). Intracultural: aimed to increase teachers’ awareness of their own stereotypes, beliefs and behaviours towards RSC populations (namely labelling and generalisations) in order to effectively address bullying, victimisation, and racist behaviours. Systemic: Roma parents’ participation in children’s school life should be strengthened. School staff may encourage home–school partnership using written communication and organising optional extra activities to involve both parents of Roma and non-Roma children. It is also crucial for teachers to support RSC culture and address language barriers, making use of trained teaching assistants as cultural and linguistic mediators. Increasing the number of teachers as cultural mediators will lead to a better understanding of Roma children’s world and will also help non-Roma students to overcome prejudice, thus promoting a culture of inclusion and care among students (Trovato; 2015). Additionally, teachers should foster children’s selfesteem by increasing socialisation processes in the class by encouraging games and activities which facilitate the sharing of school policies and promoting the development of prosocial behaviours (Trentin et al., 2006). Building caring and safe classroom environments will help students feel valued in their ethnic, cultural or national identity and origins. A multifaceted approach at curricular, relational and organisational levels will thus ensure that schools operate as caring and inclusive systems for RSC children, facilitating their academic engagement and social inclusion.

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    89

References Agi.it. (2017, April 8). Quanti sono i Rom in Italia [How many Roma are in Italy.] Retrieved from http://www.agi.it/cronaca/2017/04/08/news/quanti_sono_i_rom_in_italia-1660747/ ASGI, Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull’Immigrazione. (2009, November). Retrieved from https://www.asgi.it/wp-content/uploads/public/asgi_istruzione_ dopolalegge94.09.pdf. Accessed on August 22, 2017. Associazione 21 Luglio. (2015). Rapporto Annuale 2015. [Annual Report 2015.] Rome, Italy: Associazione 21 Luglio ONLUS. Associazione 21 Luglio. (2016a). Ultimo banco. [Last desk.] Roma, Italy: Centro Copie Venturini. Associazione 21 Luglio. (2016b). Uscire per sognare. L’infanzia rom in emergenza abitativa nella città di Roma. [Go out to dream. Roma infancy in housing emergency in the city of Rome.] Roma, Italy: Associazione 21 Luglio ONLUS. Boldrini, F., & Bracchini, M. R. (2015). Roma’s SMILE. Educative measures for fostering education and inclusion of Roma children based on prosociality. Brussels, Belgium European Commission. Bonifazi, C. (2000). European migration policy: questions from Italy. In R. King, G. Lazaridis & C. Tsardanidis (Eds.), Eldorado or fortress? Migration in Southern Europe (pp. 235–252). London: Macmillan. Cagol, M. (1995). Un popolo sconosciuto. Gli Zingari. [An unknown people. The Gypsies.] Retrieved from http://www.gfbv.it: http://www.gfbv.it/3dossier/sinti-rom/it/rom-it. html#r10. Accessed on August 21, 2017. Calabrò, A. R. (2008). Zingari. Storia di un’emergenza annunciate. [Gypsies. History of an announced emergency.] Napoli: Liguori Editore. Caritas Diocesi di Bolzano-Bressanone. (2014). I nostri alunni Rom. Risultati di una piccola indagine tra il personale docente delle scuole di Bolzano. [Our Roma pupils. Results of a small survey among the teaching staff of the Bolzano schools.] Bolzano, Italy: Caritas Diocesi Bolzano Bressanone. Carr, P. R., & Klassen, T. R. (1997). Different perceptions of race and education: Racial minority and White teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 22, 67–81. Commissioner for Human Rights. (2012). Human rights of Roma and Travellers in Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publications. Consiglio Regionale della Calabria. (2016, September 30). Proposta di legge regionale: Integrazione e promozione della minoranza Romani. [Regional law proposal: Integration and promotion of the Romani minority.] Retrieved from http://www. consiglioregionale.calabria.it/upload/versioni_atti/PL10/P.%20L.%20172-10%20testo%20comm%20bilancio.pdf. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Croce Rossa Italiana. (2010). Linee Guida di accesso nei Campi Rom e Sinti. Una raccolta di esperienze, temi di studio, modelli di progetto e proposte di lavoro offerte dai partecipanti alle operazioni di sostegno ai Nomadi. [Guidelines to access in Roma and Sinti Camps. A collection of experiences, essays, project models and work proposals offered by participants in operations supporting the Nomads.] Croce Rossa, Rome. De Luca, A. M. (2016, February 3). Sono diciassettemila i minori rom in emergenza abitativa in Italia. [Seventeen thousand Roma minors are living in an emergency in Italy.] Retrieved from https://www.repubblica.it/solidarieta/immigrazione/2016/02/03/ news/sono_diciassettemila_i_minori_rom_in_emergenza_abitativa_in_italia132651861/. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Demetrio, D., & Sbattella, F. (1987). Bambini nomadi in classe. [Nomadic children in the classroom] Marginalità e Società, 1(2), 127–144. Di Pietro, S. (2009, March 1). Cronache Italiane. A Noto in Sicilia la base di un antico popolo gitano. La capitale dei caminanti. [Italian Chronicles. In Noto in Sicily the base of an ancient Gypsy people. The capital of the caminanti.] Retrieved from http://www.sanpaolo.org/fc09/0909fc/0909fc55.htm. Accessed on July 6, 2017.

90    Valeria Cavioni Dicati Barison, M. (2000). A scuola con i bambini rom e sinti. [At school with Roma and Sinti children.] Retrieved from http://www.click.vi.it/sistemieculture/ReggioE4.html. Accessed on August 16, 2017. European Commission. (2011). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. European Roma and Travellers Forum. (2015). Fact sheet on the situation of Roma and Sinti in Italy. Retrieved from https://childhub.org/en/child-protection-online-library/ fact-sheet-situation-roma-and-sinti-italy. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Flc cgil. (2002). Contratto collettivo nazionale di lavoro relativo al personale del comparto scuola per il quadriennio normativo 2002\2005 e il primo biennio economico 2002\2003. [National collective labor contract for the personnel of the school sector for the four-year regulatory period http://www.flcgil.it/contratti/documenti/scuola/ ccnl-scuola-2002-2005-e-i-biennio-economico-2002-2003-del-24-luglio-2003.flc. Accessed on July 10, 2017. FRA – European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2009). Housing conditions of Roma and Travellers in the European Union Comparative report. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2011/housing-conditions-roma-and-travellerseuropean-union-comparative-report. Accessed on July 6, 2017. Giménez Adelantado, A. (2002). The education of Gypsy childhood in Europe. Retrieved from https://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/52413/factsheet/it. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Görgei, D. (2016). Rome schooling project fails to improve situation of Roma children. Retrieved from https://www.liberties.eu/en/news/analysis-of-the-project-schoolingroma/8310. Accessed on November 6, 2017. Guarnieri, N. (2000). Il laboratorio del sentimento. Zingari ... dal pregiudizio alla tolleranza, dalla mediazione culturale alla conosenza. [The laboratory of feeling. Gypsies ... from prejudice to tolerance, from cultural mediation to knowledge.] Silvi Marina, Italy: Opera Nomadi Abruzzo. Il Quotidiano Italiano. (2016). Romanì: avviato l’iter per il riconoscimento di minoranza linguistica. [Romanì: The process for the recognition of linguistic minority started] Retrieved from https://www.ilquotidianoitaliano.com/social-2/2016/02/ news/romanes-avviato-liter-per-il-riconoscimento-di-minoranza-linguistica-190753. html/. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Impagliazzo, M. (2008). Il caso zingari [The Gypsy case]. Milano, Italy: Leonardo International. Jordan, E. (2001). Exclusion of Travellers in State schools. Educational Research, 42(2), 117–132. Karagiorgi, Y., Symeou, L., & Crozier, G. (2009). Teacher in-service training for Roma inclusion: A resource book. Nicosia, Cyprus: Comenius Project. Karpati, M. (1988). Il bambino zingaro tra la tradizione e i nuovi progetti. [The Gypsy child between tradition and new projects.] Scuola Italiana Moderna, 10, 42–45. Kruczek-Steiger, E., & Simmons, C. (2001). The Roma: Their history and education in Poland and the UK. Educational Studies, 27(3), 281–290. Ljudska univerza Kočevje. (2015, March). Formazione nell’area della mediazione in una comunità multiculturale. [Training in the area of mediation in a multicultural community.] Retrieved from http://earlymarriage.eu/sys/wp-content/uploads//Teaching­ Material_Training-in-the-area-of-medation-in-a-multicultural-community_IT.pdf. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Mastinu, M. (1994). Popolazioni migranti insediate [Settled migrant populations.] In E. Bonacucina, F. Bua, S. Borsato, C. Cannaos, A. Cappai, P. Idini, et al. (Eds.),

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    91 Sardegna. La nuova e l’antica felicità: La nuova e l’antica felicità (pp. 208–221). Milano, Italy: FrancoAngeli. Matras, Y. (2000). Romani migrations in the post-communist era: Their historical and political significance. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 13(2), 32–50. Migration Yorkshire. (2015). Tackling racism, hostility and https://www.migrationyorkshire.org.uk/userfiles/file/publications/rm-d23-bklet-hatecrimefeb2015-en.pdf. Accessed on July 109, 2019. Migration Yorkshire. (2016). Roma Matrix. Retrieved from https://www.migrationyorkshire.org.uk/romamatrix. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione. (2007, October). La via italiana per la scuola interculturale e l’integrazione degli alunni stranieri. [The Italian way for intercultural schooling and the integration of foreign students.] Retrieved from http://hubmiur. pubblica.istruzione.it/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/cecf0709-e9dc-4387a922-eb5e63c5bab5/documento_di_indirizzo.pdf. Accessed on August 20, 2017. Ministero dell’Interno. (2006). La pubblicazione sulle minoranze senza territorio. [The publication on minorities without territory.] Rome: Ministero dell’Interno. Ministro dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR). (2012, December 27). Strumenti d’intervento per alunni con bisogni educativi speciali e organizzazione territoriale per l’inclusione scolastica. [Intervention tools for pupils with special educational needs and territorial organization for school inclusion.] Retrieved from http://integrazionescolastica.it/article/1196. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Miscioscia, S. (2014). Scuola, campi e carcere. Educazione, formazione e rieducazione per rom e sinti: note per un’antropologia applicata. [School, camps and prison. Education, training and re-education for Roma and Sinti: Notes for an applied anthropology.] DADA Rivista di Antropologia Postglobale, 7, 99–122. National Office on Anti-Racial Discriminations. (2012, February 28). National strategy for the inclusion of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti communities: European commission communication no.173/2011. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/roma_italy_strategy_en.pdf. Accessed on June 19, 2017. Opera Nomadi. (2007, February 10–11). IX Seminario Nazionale Opera Nomadi. [IX National Seminar by Opera Nomadi.] Panorama. (2008). Rom, piccolo popolo temuto: 160.000 in Italia, 70 mila sono italiani. [Roma, a feared small people: 160,000 in Italy, 70,000 are Italians.] Tratto il giorno 06 20, 2017. Retrieved from http://archivio.panorama.it/italia/Rom-piccolo-popolotemuto-160-000-in-Italia-70-mila-sono-italiani Piasere, L. (2004). I rom d’Europa. [Rome of Europe.] Roma, Italy: Laterza. Ponterotto, J. G., & Pedersen, P. B. (1993). Preventing prejudice: A guide for counselor and educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Rai Regione Sicilia. (1989, December 12). I Camminanti [Travellers], Binocolo. Retrieved from http://www.regionesicilia.rai.it/dl/sicilia/video/ContentItem-8d2fd625-587b4b51-a2f4-01c737641bd8.html. Accessed on June 19, 2017. Reyniers, A. (2008). La mobilite des tsiganes en Europe: Entre fantasmes et realites [The mobility of Gypsies in Europe: Between fantasies and realities.] Hermes, 51, 107–111. Rizza, S. (1992). Mistero e fascino dei Camminanti Sicilia. I vari aspetti di un problema sociale di ieri e di oggi: i “diversi”. [Mystery and charm of the Camminanti Sicilia. The various aspects of a social problem of yesterday and today: The “different”.] Prospettive Siracusa, 6–7. Rossi, M. (2006). Rom a Roma, pratiche di integrazione e controllo: il campo di via Casilina 700. [Roma in Rome, integration and control practices: The via Casilina 700 camp.] In R. De Angelis & F. Mignella Calvosa (Eds.), La periferia perfetta. Migrazioni, istituzioni e relazioni etniche nell’area metropolitana romana [The perfect periphery. Migration, institutions and ethnic relations in the Roman metropolitan area] (pp. 221–243). Milano, Italy: Franco Angeli.

92    Valeria Cavioni Salomoni, M. (2000). Lavoro e non lavoro nella realtà zingara. Prospettive occupazionali dei Rom [Work and not work in the Gypsy reality. Roma employment prospects]. Retrieved from http://www.click.vi.it/sistemieculture/ReggioE4.html. Accessed on August 25, 2017. Senato della Repubblica. (2011). Sintesi del rapporto conclusivo dell’indagine sulla condizione di Rom, Sinti e Caminanti in Italia. [Summary of the final report of the survey on the condition of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti in Italy] Roma, Italy: Senato della Repubblica. Setti, F. (2015). The implications of ‘naming’ on Roma and Sinti right to education and social inclusion: An ethnography of education among a Sinti family network. Intercultural Education, 26(2), 114–130. Sigona, N. (2005). Locating ‘The Gypsy Problem’. The Roma in Italy: Stereotyping, Labelling and ‘Nomad Camps’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(4), 741–756. SMILE. (2013). National Report in Italy. Retrieved from http://www.romasmile.com/ downloads/SMILE_NationalReportItaly_EN.Pdf. Accessed on August 23, 2017. SMILE. (2015). Report on testing the learning module in partner countries. Retrieved from http://www.romasmile.com/downloads/training_report_final_synthesis.pdf. Accessed on 21, 2017. Spinelli, S. (2004). La necessità di una politica europea a sostegno della cultura romaní. [The need for a European policy in support of Romani culture.] Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20101120230459/ http://www.eksetra.net/forummigra/ relSpinelli2004.shtml. Accessed on June 20, 2017. Strati, F. (2011, July). Italy promoting social inclusion of Roma: A study of national policies. Retrieved from http://www.cestim.it/argomenti/03rom-sinti/11_07_it_strati_ promoting_the_social_inclusion_of_roma.pdf. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Taddeo, R. (2008, June). Elementi quantitativi e tipologici dei nomadi presenti in italia. [Quantitative and typological elements of nomads present in Italy.] Retrieved from http://archivio.el-ghibli.org/index.php%3Fid=1&issue=05_20§ion=6&index_ po s=5.html. Accessed on July 19, 2017. Tarnovschi, D. (2012). Roma from Romania, Bulgaria, Italy and Spain. Comparative study. Bucharest, Romania: Soros Foundation Romania. Trentin, R., Monaci, M. G., De Lumèc, F., & Zanon, O. (2006). Scholastic integration of Gypsies in Italy. Teachers’ attitudes and experience. School Psychology International, 27(1), 79–103. Trovato, D. (2015, September 1). Alunni Rom, Sinti e Camminanti/RSC: Una scolarizzazione a singhiozzo. [Roma, Sinti and Caminanti / RSC students: One-off schooling.] Retrieved from https://www.scintille.it/alunni-rom-sinti-e-camminanti-rsc-una-scolarizzazione-a-singhiozzo/. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Ufficio Nazionale Antidiscriminazioni Razziali (UNAR). (2012). Strategia Nazionale d’inclusione dei Rom dei Sinti e dei Caminanti. Attuazione Comunicazione Commissione Europea n.173/2011. [National Strategy for inclusion of Roma of Sinti and Caminanti. Implementation Communication European Commission n.173/2011.] Roma, Italy: Presidenza Del Consiglio dei Ministri Dipartimento per le Pari Opportunità. Ufficio Scolastico Regionale Lazio. (1986, July 16). Scolarizzazione degli alunni zingari e nomadi nella scuola materna. Rome: Ufficio Scolastico Regione Lazio. Ufficio Scolastico Regionale per il Veneto. (2002). Vademecum informativo per l’accoglienza e la scolarizzazione degli alunni Rom, Sinti e Attrazionisti. [Informative Vademecum for the reception and schooling of Roma, Sinti and Attraction students.] Retrieved from https://www.istruzionepadova.it/intedu/documenti/VademecumSANZ.pdf. Accessed on November 4, 2017.

The Education of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti Children    93 United Nations. (1967). International coventant of economic, social and cultural rights. Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx. Accessed on July 19, 2019. Zatta, J. (1994). Gli Zingari, I Roma, una cultura ai confine. [Gypsies, Rome, a border culture.] Padova, Italy: Edizioni Cidi Triveneto.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 5

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway Kari Hagatun Abstract In this chapter the author outlines the educational situation for Roma in Norway, where there are two main groups of Romani-speaking people, referred to as Roma and Romani people, who have lived in Norway for centuries. Both have a status of national minorities. After describing the social situation of the Norwegian Roma minority, the author shows their culture and language. Then the author outlines the characteristics of the Norwegian education system and the educational attainment of Roma. After presenting the most important policies and support programmes for Roma Education, the author presents findings from her project ‘Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced Narratives on Schooling and Future’. Keywords: Norway; Roma and Romani People; national minority; discrimination; Vlach Roma; Citizen, Romlo; Romlostjenesten

The Roma Minority in Norway Groups, Numbers and Legal Status There are two main groups of Romani-speaking people, referred to as Roma and Romani people,1 who have lived in Norway for centuries. Norway, unlike most other European countries, recognises these groups as two different national

1

Romani people are also referred to, and refer to themselves, as ‘tatere’ or ‘reisende’ (travellers). Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 95–116 Copyright © 2020 by Kari Hagatun Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191010

96    Kari Hagatun minorities. Despite a shared origin, Roma and Romani people are considered to differ in culture and history, and to face different challenges when dealing with the authorities and society. Both Roma and Romani people gained status as national minorities in 1999, when Norway ratified the European council’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of 1 February 1995.2 Granting a minority the status of national minority entails the promotion of equal opportunities for access to education at all levels for persons belonging to the national minority, and to promote the conditions necessary to maintain and develop their culture, language and identity (The European Council, 1995). By ratifying the European charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML, 1993), Norway is committed to protect and promote the different national minority languages. In Norway, unlike in other European countries, Roma and Romani people are recognised as having different national minority languages. While ‘Romanés’ is the official term for the Romani-variety related to the Roma group, ‘Romani’ is the equivalent term for the Romani-variety related to the Romani people. By ratifying these international conventions Norway has undertaken serious commitments on behalf of the national minorities. Still, few of the commitments have been incorporated in Norwegian law. For example, even if recognised as a national minority language, Romanés still lacks legal foundation in the Norwegian legislation (Schall, 2017). One criterion for gaining national minority status in Norway is that the minority must have a long-lasting historical presence (AID, 2009). This criterion entails that neither so-called migrant Roma coming from other parts of Europe to earn a living, nor Roma that settled after the resolution of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, qualify for the status of national minority in Norway. This chapter concerns itself with the group that is recognised as the national minority Roma, and who are referred to, and refer to themselves, as Roma. The chapter gives some brief background information about the group’s history, culture and living conditions, before addressing the educational situation. The present community of Roma is organised in eight extended families, mainly living in the Municipality of Oslo (AID, 2009). The community is estimated to count some 700 individuals (AID, 2009; Engebrigtsen, 2015), but because Norwegian law limits registration of ethnicity3 the estimates are uncertain. Roma are regarded as seminomadic and about 200 individuals belonging to the community are assumed to have more or less permanent residence abroad (Ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roman Issues (CAHROM), 2013). Roma in Norway are part of the Vlach4 Roma subgroup living in Western Europe (Lidén & Engebrigtsen, 2010). Historically, the community descends from nineteenth century immigrant families who travelled around Europe after

2

In addition, Jews, Kvens and Forest Finns were recognised as national minorities. According to Statistics Norway ethnicity is not available in any registers, only parental country of birth (Simon, 2007). 4 Groups whose Romani varieties are determined by Walachian are termed Vlach-Roma (Teichmann, 2001). 3

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    97 the abolishment of Roma slavery in Romania in the 1850s (Hanisch, 1976). In Norway, some of the families obtained passports and they were not perceived as different from other travellers at the time (Lidén & Engebrigtsen, 2010). This changed in the 1920s when the regulation of passports became stricter and the Norwegian government started to concern itself with Roma matters. While Romani people were subjected to forced assimilation and had to abandon their traditional ways of living, Roma were considered impossible to assimilate. They were often deprived of their Norwegian citizenship and forced to travel to other parts of Europe (Brustad, Lien, & Rosvoll, 2017). When Roma families tried to return before World War II, they were stopped at the border and deprived of their Norwegian passports. As a consequence, most Roma previously living in Norway were later killed in the concentration camps. The few survivors struggled until the 1950s to gain back their Norwegian citizenship, while suffering traumas and grieving the loss of family members during the war (Rosvoll, Lien, & Brustad, 2015). On 8th April, 2015, Prime Minister Erna Solberg publicly apologised for the exclusion policy conducted against Roma before and after World War II, and the dire consequences of this policy during the Holocaust (Norwegian Church Aid, 2017).

Social Situation of the Roma Minority There is limited systematised and updated knowledge about Roma in Norway (AID, 2009; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Lidén, 2005). However, consistent findings indicate that many experience problems related to housing, health issues, unemployment, low school attendance and poverty, and that life conditions do not seem to be improving (Council of Europe (CoE), 2015; Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). In the public discourse they are often negatively stereotyped, with focus on violent conflicts, fraud and children’s absence from school (Hagatun, 2013). Studies show that Roma are subjected to extensive discrimination (HL-senteret, 2012; Rosvoll & Bielenberg, 2012), and are living segregated from the Norwegian society (AID, 2009; Engebrigtsen, 2015). Segregation is found to be maintained both through the majority’s discrimination and by Roma’s own traditions, which maintain a strong dichotomy between Roma and ‘the others’ (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). The segregation can also be regarded in light of the difficulties Roma experience in the labour market. In a highly modernised society, the sustainability of Roma’s traditional ways to earn a living, such as coppersmithing and peddling wares, have diminished over time (AID, 2009). In addition, the lack of schooling makes it difficult to enter the labour market. While some rely on different business ventures like trading in property for periods of time, many are unemployed, which again leads to poverty and dependence on social welfare benefits (AID, 2009; Engebrigtsen, 2015; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Most Roma adults are regarded as functionally illiterate in both Norwegian and Romanés (AID, 2009; Engebrigtsen, 2015). Combined with a low level of education, illiteracy makes it difficult to navigate within the systems of the majority society (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014).

98    Kari Hagatun According to Roma themselves, they receive limited understanding and assistance from the public services (AID, 2009), and are often unable to claim their rights because this requires reading information online, filling out forms and answering letters (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). One direct consequence is inadequate health care. Roma report to have limited contact with health services, and problems with alcohol and drug addiction are often described (AID, 2009). Torbjørg Bay found an increase in conflicts and decrease in unity within the community in the period of 2001–2009 (AID, 2009). In recent years several violent episodes between members of different Roma families have created pressure and fear within the community (Aarset & Lidén, 2017; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Another main concern is the persistent poor housing situation within the community. Roma families are often forced to move to new locations within the Municipality of Oslo because of discrimination and economic problems. These conditions affect children’s schooling, due to the subsequent frequent change of schools (AID, 2009). Roma seem to fall outside the structures of the Norwegian welfare state and this affects children in particular (AID, 2009). A survey conducted by Hilde Lidén (2005) on children and adolescents from national minorities in the Nordic countries, found the Roma children in Norway to be poorly integrated and few were found to attend school regularly. The parents were often unemployed and had problems with housing, poverty, health care, crime and alcohol/drug addiction (Lidén, 2005). After a visit in 2015, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe reported serious concern regarding the frequent use of child protection measures separating Roma children from their families (CoE, 2015). Civil society representatives reported that nearly half5 of the children in the community were either already placed in foster care, or vulnerable to such interventions. It was argued that interventions might be necessary, but that more supporting measures should be considered for families at risk (CoE, 2015). The fact that Roma children in foster care often lose access to knowledge about their biological family’s culture and language is also a concern (Aarset & Lidén, 2017).

Culture and Language Vlach Roma have a particularly strong identity as Roma and thus feel a strong responsibility to maintain the ‘correct way of life’ (Lidén, 1990). Each of the eight extended Roma families in Norway represents an economic, political and judicial unit. Loyalty towards family and the Roma community is a central value (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010, p. 199). Roma in Norway are endogamous and most often marry other Roma. Arranged marriages are common and wed couples traditionally live with the man’s family6 (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010, p. 199).

5

Approximately 60 Roma children from the community are estimated to have been placed in foster care outside the Roma community, and further 60 children are estimated to be vulnerable to such interventions in the future (CoE, 2015, p. 17). 6 According to Engebrigtsen (2015) there is today an increase in single parent families/ nuclear families within the community.

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    99 Most define travelling as an important part of the Roma way of life (CAHROM, 2013). They often travel during spring, summer and fall to earn money and attend social gatherings with kin from all over Europe. As the community belongs to the European Rom Pentecostalism Church, families travel to join international religious gatherings (Engebrigtsen, 2015). The emphasis on maintaining the correct Roma way of life can also be seen in the strong standing traditional system of purity within the community. This system regulates the relationship between men and women, adults and children, and Roma and non-Roma. The system also regulates the transition from childhood to adulthood. From the age of twelve the adolescents are treated as adults and the rules of purity start to apply (Lidén, 1990). If individuals, especially girls, break the rules and become ‘unclean’, the consequences within the community are grave (Lidén, 1990; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014). Thus, the moral system can be seen to represent a strong social control mechanism (Bay, 2002). Because non-Roma do not live by the rules of purity and thus are considered unclean, the moral system creates a distance between Roma and the rest of the society. According to Engebrigtsen and Lidén (2010) children understand themselves to be different from non-Roma from an early age, and learn to consider the Roma way of life as the best way to live. Not to identify oneself with the society as such, represents an effective defense strategy that has made it possible for Roma to endure discrimination and stigmatising (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). In a mapping conducted in 2009, approximately 116 children in the community were found to be in preschool age (CAHROM, 2013). While nearly all children in Norway attend kindergarten, Roma children seldom attend. Roma mothers tend to view kindergarten as unsafe, and within the community it has been regarded as shameful for a mother to let others take care of the children, which is perceived as her most important work (Hasvoll, 2015). Instead, children are socialised by being in the family and seldom subjected to customised sleeping routines or fixed meals. To demonstrate a strong will is considered a valuable trait, representing autonomy, but at the same time children are expected to respect parents and elders (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Lidén, 1990). The language Romanés means ‘in a Rom way’ (Matras, 2005, p. 1). There is limited research on the linguistic varieties among Roma in Norway, but most are considered to speak Lovara Romani, a variety that is connected to the occupational affiliation of trading horses, and which belongs to the Northern Vlax group (ROMLEX, 2017; Schall, 2017). Most Norwegian adult Roma are bilingual, speaking both Romanés and Norwegian, with Romanés as their first language (Bay, 2002; Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Lidén, 1990). Thus, most preschool children in the community can be described as monolingual, speaking only Romanés when enrolling in primary school. This fact is, according to Verena Schall (2017), an indicator of the strong oral position the language has in the community and how well it is preserved compared to other national minority languages in Norway. A 56-year-old man expresses the importance of the language like this: ‘It is a language, and if you don’t speak Romanés, you are not Rom anymore. You have lost it’ (Oslo Museum, 2015, p. 34).

100    Kari Hagatun Romanés is primarily considered a vivid oral language and Roma in Norway have strong traditions in storytelling. In 2016 Roma representatives published a fairy tale book in Romanés (Lakatosova, Lorentsen, & Hasvoll, 2016). Writing in Romanés is proven to be challenging in many ways, for one due to the lack of a written standard of Romanés in Norway (Schall, 2017). Combined with the limited traditional use of Romanés in written form, the lack of such a standard has hampered development of written school material that could help the Roma pupils in their learning.

Roma in the Education System in Norway The Norwegian Education System The Norwegian school system consists of three parts; elementary school (ages 6–13), lower secondary school (ages 13–16), and upper secondary school (ages 16–19). Both elementary and lower secondary school attendance is compulsory, meaning that every Norwegian child has both a right and an obligation to complete lower secondary school. Most often pupils are required to change schools in the transition from elementary to lower secondary school. After completing lower secondary school, pupils have the right, but are not obliged, to complete three years of upper secondary school. To gain access to higher education at Universities or at University Colleges, the applicants must have attained a general university admissions certificate. In Norway, the principle ‘lifelong learning’ has led to a strong emphasis on adult education for several decades. In 1976 the first law providing adults the legal right to develop their competence through educational measures was implemented. From 2002, adults above the age of 16 gained the legal right to customised primary education. Adults over the age of 25, who have completed primary school, gained the legal right to upper secondary school. Adults without a diploma from upper secondary school have the opportunity to go into certain vocational training programmes based on mappings of their prior learning (Regjeringen.no., 2016).

Educational Attainment of the Roma in Norway Addressing educational attainment usually entails summaries of recent research and statistics on the position of an ethnic group in education. Thus, before looking at the educational attainment of Roma at the different levels of schooling in Norway, there is a need to address a contextual issue. Because Norwegian law limits registration of ethnicity, there is a lack of official statistics and surveys which show school enrolment ratios or literacy rates related to Roma pupils. Thus, it is difficult to give exact and updated knowledge about the educational attainment of Roma in Norway. The following descriptions of attainment at the different school levels are based on the few quantitative estimates that are available in official reports, and on qualitative knowledge found in political documents as well as the limited research literature that has focussed specifically on Roma’s educational situation (Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014). Knowledge based upon

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    101 recently conducted research interviews with Roma representatives, teachers and mediators, is included to provide some indications about the current situation (Hagatun, 2016, 20177).

Elementary School and Lower Secondary School The estimates of how many Roma children of compulsory school age are currently living in Norway are vague (Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, 2013). In 2015, the Council of Europe reported: There are about 120 Roma children between the ages of 6 and 15 (age of compulsory education) living in Oslo. In 2012 it was estimated that only 71 of them were registered in a school class. In addition, many Roma children who are registered at school are often absent when their families go travelling. At the end of their compulsory education, many Roma children leave school without a diploma. (CoE, 2015, p. 17) This information is based on a report from the Council of Europe ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roma issues (CAHROM, 2013) that refer to three mappings of the Roma community conducted in 2008, 2009 and 2012. This report displays the number of children and adolescents who were described as being abroad at the time of the mappings: ‘Approximately 105 children are of primary school age, of which 31 are abroad. Approximately 73 teenagers are between 14 to 19 years old, of which approximately 40 are abroad’ (CAHROM, 2013). Because these descriptions distinguish between different age groups it is possible to relate to the different levels of compulsory school. The descriptions show that approximately 30% of the children from the community that could be enrolled in elementary school are described as ‘being abroad’. Among the adolescents that could be enrolled in lower secondary school, the percentage of individuals abroad has increased to approximately 50%. Even if one cannot rule out the possibility that some of these children and adolescents have been enrolled in schools abroad, there are no indications in research literature or reports on such practices. These numbers support the impression that many adolescents from the community drop out of school before the transition to lower secondary school. They either go abroad or are said to ‘be abroad’ and this is used as an explanation as to why they do not enrol in lower secondary school. The assumption that many children, especially girls, drop out of school when they reach puberty is described in reports and qualitative research

7

The research interviews are conducted in 2016/2017 and represent preliminary findings in the ongoing research project ‘The Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced Narratives on Schooling and Future’ by Hagatun. The findings are presented and discussed as papers at several international conferences (Hagatun, 2016, 2017).

102    Kari Hagatun literature (AID, 2009; Bay, 2002; CAHROM, 2013; Engebrigtsen, 2015; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Representatives who work closely with the Roma community report that the high drop-out rate before lower secondary school remains an issue (Hagatun, 2016, 2017). In addition to the persistently high drop-out rates, high levels of absenteeism among Roma pupils in elementary and lower secondary school have long been a concern. In 2009/2010, the Municipality of Oslo conducted a mapping of absenteeism among the 70 pupils speaking Romanés as their first language enrolled in schools at that time. The results indicated that these pupils were absent from school eight times more than the average pupil in the municipality. The numbers are equivalent to being absent from school every third day (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In 2012/2013, the Municipality of Oslo conducted a similar mapping, showing that the Roma children on average were absent from school 54 out of 190 days (Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, 2013). The results from these two mappings indicate that the level of absenteeism among Roma students stayed at approximately the same level in 2009/2010 and 2012/2013. Absenteeism among Roma children is also described in reports and qualitative research literature (AID, 2009; Bay, 2002; Engebrigtsen, 2015; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In 2013, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) expressed concerns about the ‘the very high levels of absenteeism of Roma children of compulsory school age, despite the measures taken by the State’ (CESCR, 2013, p. 6). The same year, the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (NI), and the Ombudsman for children both expressed similar concerns, where high levels of absenteeism are seen as hindering successful integration of Roma families and their children. Furthermore, the high level of absenteeism affects the children’s education and ability to participate in society as well as enjoy other human rights on an equal basis with other children. (NI, 2013) Teachers, mediators and Roma representatives report that more Roma children attend school on a more regular basis now and that several families have reduced their travelling. However, they also report that the level of absenteeism among Roma pupils is still high and represents an impediment for these pupils’ learning as well as their integration into the social life in class (Hagatun, 2016, 2017).

Upper Secondary School According to Statistics Norway (2017), 37.8% of the Norwegian population 16 years and older have attained upper secondary school education. In the age group 20–24 the equivalent percentage is 48.7. There are no available official statistics or mappings of attainment of Roma in upper secondary school. However, some indication of an extremely low level of attainment can be found in research literature. According to Engebrigtsen (2015, p. 124) only ‘two young Roma have completed high school and vocational training since the Norwegian Roma settled permanently

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    103 after the Second World War’. In conversation with Roma one often hears the narrative that only two individuals from the Roma community ever completed upper secondary school (Engebrigtsen, 2015; Hagatun, 2016, 2017; Lidén & Engebrigtsen, 2010). In addition, two other adolescents from the community are currently said to be enrolled in upper secondary school (Hagatun, 2016, 2017).

College and University According to Statistics Norway (2017) 32.9% of the population in Norway has attained higher education. In the Municipality of Oslo, where most Roma live, half of the overall population aged 16 years and over have attained higher education. However, there is no knowledge about the attainment of Roma in higher education that can be validated by official statistics. In prior qualitative research and recent research interviews (Hagatun, 2016, 2017), there are no descriptions of individuals from the Roma community in Norway who have ever gained degrees from, or are currently enrolled in, Norwegian University colleges or Universities.

Adult Education In 2012, approximately 61% of adults in Norway participated in education or training at different levels (Statistics Norway, 2013a). According to the OECD Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), Norwegian adults have proficiency above the OECD average in numeracy, literacy, and problem solving (Statistics Norway, 2013b). However, due to lack of schooling, most Norwegian Roma adults are regarded functionally illiterate and this also applies to young adults in the community (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In 2007 the Municipality of Oslo initiated an adult educational programme in order to increase qualifications among young Roma adults, enabling employment in the regular labour market. At the start, an average of 20 individuals from the Roma community attended the classes, but from 2009 to 2012 the level of attendance declined. In 2012, severe conflicts in the community led to even lower levels of attendance and all teaching was stopped in periods of time (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). An evaluation of the programme found that only three to four pupils had attended the teaching on a more regular basis from 2007 to 2014. Even though these pupils gained relevant competences, for example, reading skills, none of the attendees gained formal diplomas. Nevertheless, approximately 10 individuals secured a driver’s license during the programme period (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In 2014, a vocational training programme targeting adult Roma was started in the Municipality of Oslo with six participants. The attendance rate was evaluated as satisfactory and the participants secured internships at different work places with access to vocational training throughout the programme (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Through internships at ‘The department for Roma Measures in Oslo’, several Roma adults gained vocational training in mediating, which resulted in more regular employment as Roma mediators (The Department for Roma Measures, 2012).

104    Kari Hagatun There are no available official statistics or mappings of attainment of Roma in the regular adult education system. Based on qualitative research there is few indications that Roma adults have attended such regular adult education courses. Recent research interviews indicate that individuals from the community have taken courses from secondary school and participated in vocational training during imprisonment (Hagatun, 2016, 2017).

Explanations on the Low Educational Attainment of Roma in Norway In sum, the attainment of Roma at the different levels of the educational system must be described as consistently low, especially when compared to the relatively high levels of educational attainment in the Norwegian population. Roma’s strong wish to guard their traditions, such as the nomadic lifestyle, are generally pointed out as the main obstacles to better education (AID, 2009; Bay, 2002; Engebrigtsen, 2015; Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Lidén, 2005; Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In order to withstand forced assimilation in the past, Roma developed defense strategies which are activated when education is experienced as threatening to the Roma way of life (Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Lidén, 1990). Although tending to regard education as a threat to a decent life as Roma, many parents also express that the children need schooling (AID, 2009; Bay, 2002; Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010; Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014; Lidén, 2005; Westrheim & Hagatun, 2015). However, parents often demonstrate a pragmatic view where schooling is not necessarily regarded as part of an education which leads to qualifying for work, and consider elementary skills in writing, reading and mathematics to be sufficient (Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014). Thus, even though the sustainability of Roma’s traditional ways to earn a living is decreasing and leads to concerns among parents regarding their children’s future, especially regarding sons, education is still not clearly portrayed as a solution to these concerns. Marriage is still considered to be the main future dream on behalf of daughters and education beyond primary school is portrayed as jeopardising the daughters’ purity and future (Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014). However, some parents, mainly women, currently express that they clearly prioritise education (Aarset & Lidén, 2017; Hagatun, 2016, 2017). Roma families’ lack of everyday routines that are compatible with the school routine is described as an impeding factor (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Also, the frequent violent episodes and the fear these creates, often frighten parents from sending their children to school (The Department of Roma Measures, 2012). The hindering factors described above are related to the Roma community and the Roma way of life. Other hindering factors are related to how the pupils and parents are confronted when encountering the educational system. Fears of children being bullied, or subjected to discrimination, are reasons why parents are reluctant to send children to school (Aarset & Lidén, 2017). In addition, parents and pupils often experience teachers and school authorities as lacking in knowledge about the Roma way of life, fearing for instance that the school will contact the Children Welfare Service because of misunderstandings (Hagatun & Westrheim, 2014).

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    105 Experiences show that Roma pupils often do not get help according to their needs. They are expected to follow the instructions in Norwegian even if they only speak Romanés. Due to high level of absence, Roma pupils are missing out on knowledge and assistance that their peers receive, resulting in a lack of motivation (Aarset & Lidén, 2017). The parents’ lack of primary skills hinders them from supporting their children’s schooling, which hampers the children’s chances to fulfil primary school (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). Despite some positive development, the overall educational situation for the Roma in Norway seems to remain persistently poor. A relevant question is, how this can happen to a relatively small group of people in a highly developed welfare state (Engebrigtsen, 2015). Norway has been ranked the highest for 13 years on the UN’s Human Development Index, with an average of 17.7 expected years of schooling (UNDP, 2016). Part of the answer to the question might be found in the Norwegian policy towards Roma.

Policies and Support Programmes for Roma Education Historically, the integration policy towards Roma in Norway has alternated between (1) attempts at forced assimilation; (2) special measures targeted to maintain Roma’s culture while improving their economical-social situation; and (3) equal treatment-policy (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). This part of the chapter will address changes in policy from the 1960s till today and describe some of the current educational measures being taken. In the beginning of the 1960s, the Norwegian government started to concern itself with the lack of schooling and housing among the approximately 60 Roma then living in Oslo (Lidén & Engebrigtsen, 2010). Some measures were initiated, but the authorities’ lack of knowledge about Roma’s values and traditional ways of living resulted in limited effects (Hanish, 1976). In 1972 the government launched a White paper (Norwegian Ministry of Social Affairs, 1972) which emphasised the importance of not implementing measures that could threaten the identity of the Roma. Separate classes for Roma pupils and teaching according to their abilities and needs, preferably in their mother tongue, were emphasised. This policy was in line with the overall minority policy in Norway at the time and represents a shift from earlier assimilation policy (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). One measure named ‘The office for Gypsy Issues’ was initiated to help Roma to improve their living conditions, and separate Roma classes were gradually established at certain schools in Oslo (AID, 2009). The aim was to ‘secure the children a proper education that could help them live independently in Norway’ (Engebrigtsen, 2015, p. 119), as well as protect the pupil’s language and culture. Roma women were periodically engaged as mother tongue assistants in these classes and some teaching materials in Romanés were developed (AID, 2009). In 1973 adaptive training for adult Roma was initiated and aimed to teach adults basic reading and writing skills, and to provide vocational training (AID, 2009). In 1990, all these special measures for Roma were abolished. The reason given by the Oslo City Council was that Roma should be treated as other Norwegian citizens (AID, 2009). The abolishment of the measures was also due to their

106    Kari Hagatun limited success. According to Ada Engebrigtsen and Hilde Lidén (2010) this was caused by limited understanding of how Roma’s longstanding position as ‘strangers’ had led to the development of cultural defense strategies. Roma used these strategies to enable the maintenance of the way of life they identified with, when at the same time expressing a desire to become integrated in the society. This dual approach often confused, and still confuses, the authorities and people working with Roma (Engebrigtsen, 2015; Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). The general experience from the period of special measures was that relatively many Roma children attended the separate classes. But the drop-out rate and level of absenteeism were high, and few pupils learnt to read and write. In some families none of the children enrolled in class, often due to extensive travelling (Engebrigtsen, 2015). Children that attended the classes on a more regular basis often came from families that seemed somewhat marginalised within the Roma community (Engebrigtsen, 2015; Lidén, 1990). According to Bay (2002) the shift from separate Roma classes to enrolment in ordinary classes led to a dramatic decrease in Roma pupil’s school attendance. The schools could apply for extra funding in order to support each Roma pupil enrolled in the school (AID, 2009). While some studies have found that the funding benefited Roma pupils, for example, by employing extra staff (Bjørndal and Nordby, referred in Engebrigtsen, 2015), other schools report negative experiences with the funding, because they lose the funding if Roma pupils drop out before the end of the school year (Hagatun, 2016, 2017). The shift in policy in the 1990s, where Roma were treated as ordinary citizens, was in line with a shift in the overall policy towards minorities in Norway at the time. Welfare policy was no longer based on group rights, but on individual rights (Brochmann & Kjeldstadli, 2008). According to Engebrigtsen (2015, p. 120) ‘culture and ethnicity was now regarded as a private quality and not a matter for public education’. This line of policy is still prominent today and shapes the way the educational system deals with minority issues. In educational policy literature the term ‘diversity’ is often used when addressing differences, representing a neoliberal view where differences are recognised on the individual level, not on the group level (Borchgrevink & Brochmann, 2008; Westrheim & Hagatun, 2015). In such a political climate it has proved difficult to establish special measures targeting certain groups. This can be part of the explanation why, despite recognising Roma and other national minorities certain rights through the ratification of international conventions, few of these rights have been incorporated in Norwegian law. One example is the policy regarding minority languages in school that was implemented in the 1990s and is still the policy today. According to this policy, pupils with minority background can have subjects taught in their first language, or they can get extra lessons in the Norwegian language, until they have learnt sufficient Norwegian to follow the ordinary curriculum (Norwegian Directorate of Education, 2014).The Samis and the Kvens are the only groups which have incorporated the right to learn and develop through their first language in schools into national law, in accordance with the European charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML, 1993). Roma pupils, despite their status as national minority and inclusion in the European charter for Regional or

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    107 Minority Languages, have not gained this right, according to national law. This policy entails that, with the exception of the Kven language, national minority languages are not considered as valuable and worth preserving but are reduced to tools for learning Norwegian (Westrheim & Hagatun, 2015). This policy is not in accordance with the international commitment Norway has undertaken to preserve Romanés and other national minority languages. The reluctance to implement special measures for persons belonging to certain minorities was a prominent issue in 2009, when the Ministry of Work and Inclusion presented the ‘Action plan for improvement of the living conditions of Roma in Oslo’ (AID, 2009). The background was Norway’s recognition of Roma as a national minority in 1999, and a subsequent white paper, ‘Norwegian National Minorities – State Policy regarding Jews, Kvens, Roma, Romani people/Taters and Forest Finns’ (Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, 2001). The Action plan (AID, 2009) mainly focussed on enabling Roma to take advantage of the universal measures already existing in the welfare state. The bureaucrats writing the plan were sceptic to continue the line of special measures that had been heavily criticised in the 1990s (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In regard to education, some special measures were mentioned in the plan, mainly focussing on adult education. The plan did not launch new special measures directly targeting the low educational attainment of Roma children (Engebrigtsen, 2015; Hagatun, 2013), and was thus criticised for ignoring the perspective of children (SEIF, 2011; The Ombudsman for Children, 2010). The Action plan (AID, 2009) stressed the need to ‘clarify the relationship between national and international law in the area of education’ with the aim of ‘improving the follow-up of the Roma’s right to conserve their culture, language and identity’ (AID, 2009, p. 42). The plan especially focussed on travelling as an issue where it is unclear ‘how far the schools should go to meet wishes for culturally adapted education’ (AID, 2009, p. 43). This was in line with The European Commission (EC) which solicits the Norwegian government to increase their focus on the problems facing Roma pupils in school, stressing the importance of fitting Roma’s nomadic lifestyle into the educational system (FAK, 2010). In 2011 a report on the relationship between international and national law was presented by the Ministry of Education (Simonsen, 2011). The report’s main conclusion was that national law on education is in accordance with international law, but that a strict interpretation of the national law on the municipal level causes problems, for example, with handling absence among Roma pupils due to travelling (Simonsen, 2011). One example of the strict interpretation of the law is the Municipality of Oslo’s instruction to the schools to expel pupils after two weeks’ of illegal absence. The report recommends some changes in the National law in order to clarify the requirements for special measures, required under international law when such measures are needed (Simonsen, 2011). However, there has been neither a change in the National law (Engebrigtsen, 2015), nor a change in the interpretation on the municipal level, in the years since the report was presented (Hagatun, 2013). In order to achieve the various goals in the Action plan (AID, 2009) the Municipality of Oslo established ‘The Department of Roma Measures’ in 2007.

108    Kari Hagatun From the beginning, the department focussed mainly on an advisory service for Roma and on education for Roma adults. From 2012 a measure termed ‘Romlostjenesten’ (RLT) was established to follow-up on Roma pupils and their parents in primary school (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In addition, some mediators with Roma background worked in a project where they informed schools about Roma history and culture (The Department of Roma measures, 2012). In 2014 the measures following the Action plan from 2009 were evaluated (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). The advisory service was evaluated to be vital to the Roma community and this service was proposed to be maintained in the planned ‘Roma Culture and Resource Center – Romano Kher’. The centre opened in 2018 and is funded by collective monetary damages granted to the Roma community for the suffering inflicted by the Norwegian State during World War II (Norwegian Church Aid, 2017). Regarding the adult education measures, the evaluation was mainly negative and the measure was ended in 2015. Regarding the newly started ‘RLT’, the evaluation was mainly positive, and the measure was therefore expanded in 2015/2016. This will be the main focus in the next part of this chapter. To conclude this part, the Norwegian Roma policy and educational measures historically have been, and still are, strongly influenced by the duality between international commitments that require Norway to preserve Roma culture, language and identity, and a national legislation and minority policy that makes it difficult to implement special measures which are needed. After Tyldum and Friberg’s (2014) evaluation of the Action plan (AID, 2009) no new plan has been developed, despite encouragement from the UN CESCR: ‘The Committee recommends that the State party establish a new plan of action, based on an evaluation of the 2009 plan of action’ (CESCR, 2013, p. 6).

The Project ‘Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced Narratives on Schooling and Future’ In Norway, as in the rest of Scandinavia, there is a lack of research studies that contextualise the childhood of the Roma children and studies that present Roma’s own perspectives on education and the future (Lidén, 2005; Palosuo, 2008). This part will present some preliminary findings in Hagatun’s ongoing qualitative research project ‘The Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced Narratives on Schooling and Future’ (2016–2020). The aim in the following is to present Roma’s own perspectives, and to discuss some main challenges and opportunities, related to the ‘RLT’, currently the main official special measure targeting the low educational attainment among Roma pupils in Norway. The presentation is based on the analysis of interviews, field conversations and observations conducted in Oslo, mainly in the period 2016/2017. The interviews are conducted with Roma pupils, Roma parents, and with teachers and Roma mediators previously or currently employed in the service. RLT was first initiated in 2012 when one teacher was hired to work with Roma pupils at a primary school in Oslo in 2012 and 2013 (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). In 2013, another teacher was hired to work with pupils at several schools in the

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    109 municipality. Since then the service has gradually expanded, and in spring 2017 employed four to five teachers and school assistants/Roma mediators (Mørland, 2017). The service, currently organised as a part of the municipalities’ Department of Roma measures, intends to function as an extra resource for Roma children and adolescents between the ages of 6 to 16, in various schools in Oslo. The teachers and mediators aim to (1) strengthen the cooperation between school and Roma families; (2) enhance Roma pupils’ educational achievement and attendance rate; and to (3) better the pupils’ transition between the different school levels to prevent drop-out (Osloskolen, 2015). One of the main findings is that the measure accentuates different issues regarding what kind of competence that is needed to reach the goals described above. One crucial issue is whether it is necessary for the staff to have Roma background, or if people without such background can reach the goals. When the RLT was initiated in 2012, the intention was to employ a school mediator with Roma background. According to informants, this intention was based on international positive experiences, for example, in Sweden, where they find that employing school mediators with Roma background has a significant positive impact on Roma pupils’ educational achievements (Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2015). The intention was also based on the fact that a Rom already worked informally as a mediator, trying to get more Roma children to school. But still, the position, termed ‘Romlos’,8 was given to an applicant without Roma background. The reason for this was that the Municipality of Oslo required the applicants to such positions to have attained formal higher education, preferably teacher education. Thus, because there are currently no Roma in Norway known to have gained higher education, no staff with Roma background were employed in the service from 2012 to 2016. When asked in 2016, most Roma informants expressed concern about the staff’s lack of Roma background, and the subsequent lack of trust, as expressed by a Roma mother: When the ‘Romlos’ comes to your home: ‘Hi, my name is [Norwegian name]’. Then you really get surprised. ‘Should I open up to this person, telling her about things? I already have a lot of problems with gaze.9 Should I then open myself up to her? No, no!’ So, then I just say: ‘Oh, everything is fine!’ However, one parent demonstrated a more pragmatic approach: That the ‘Romlos’ is Norwegian might be better because the schools will listen more closely to him. (…) That he has a louder voice than if a Rom calls the schools. (…) Because, you know, we

8

The term ‘Romlos’ has sometimes been translated to ‘Roma pilot’ (Engebrigtsen, 2015). This text will use the Norwegian term. The meaning of the concept will be explained and problematised in the following discussion. 9 Romanis term for non-Roma.

110    Kari Hagatun have to think about being heard, and if the voice is Norwegian, they will listen more to him. The question about Roma background is a question about what kind of competence that is most needed to do the work as ‘Romlos’. For most of the Roma informant’s, intimate knowledge about Roma culture and way of life, and to have trust in the community, are expressed as the most important competences. While these can be described as informal competences that must be gained by being a part of the Roma community, the municipality emphasised formal competences – certificates – only to be gained through formal education. A concern raised by several informants, both Roma and non-Roma, was whether the requirement of formal competences in the service could in fact hamper an increased educational attainment among the Roma pupils. They saw the requirement as yet another example of how the reluctance to implement special measures on the municipal level makes it difficult to create positive change for Roma. A concern raised by some informants was that it would be difficult for Roma to work as mediators because this would be to undermine their own status and trust within the Roma community. To be employed by non-Roma has traditionally not been popular among most Roma in Norway. Still, several Roma informants expressed that they wanted to work as Roma mediators, for example: I want to get into the schools where there are Roma children and help them, so that they can understand what a school is, to support them, to create trust in the class. (Roma mother) In 2016, the Municipality of Oslo decided to employ two Roma school assistants/mediators at RLT, each in a 50% position (Mørland, 2017). Roma background was now a requirement, along with elementary skills in reading and writing. This can be interpreted as a shift in the municipalities’ policy on valuable competence in the service. The experiences with Roma mediators working along with the teachers without Roma background have been good: I think we cooperate in a very good way. I see that she [the teacher] really wants the best for us Roma and the pupils. She has learnt so much in the time we have worked together […]. She wants to learn, to understand us. […] I tell the others in the community that they can trust her. […] I help her, and she helps me. (Roma mediator) I spend much more time now with the regular teachers at the schools where I work with Roma pupils. I talk to them about Roma culture and communicate with them about the pupils […] and what they struggle with. This is something I have learnt from the Roma mediator that I am working closely with, the importance of giving knowledge to the schools and talking with the teachers. So, I experience that I work more and more as a mediator myself, not only as a teacher for Roma pupils […]. So, I don’t think that

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    111 we have such different roles now, the teachers and the mediators. (Teacher) We see that the different parties, teachers and Roma mediators, draw on each other’s competences, and that the formal and informal competences thus are combined. The roles remain different, but as the cooperation deepens, the roles become more equal. Recently, a gradual shift in how the teachers view their role and the work they are doing has been observed. While the teachers earlier tended to regard themselves more exclusively as ‘teachers teaching Roma pupils’, they now express a growing awareness of the importance of mediating between parents, teachers and pupils. Thus, a question that arises is whether the staffs that are currently called ‘teachers’ in the service could be considered ‘mediators’, even though they lack Roma background. The school mediators10 with Roma background currently working in RLT are often referred to as school assistants. According to Liégeois (2007) one should differentiate between the concepts of mediator and assistant. While the term ‘school mediator’ indicates a process between equal parties working together, the term ‘school assistants’ implies an unequal relationship between Roma and non-Roma. Another distinction is that while school assistants work mainly in the classroom, the mediators ‘act as an interface between schools and the community’ (Liégeois, 2007, p. 307). Both teachers and Roma assistants/mediators working in the service are called ‘Romlos’. However, this term seems to bear no clear meaning in itself for Roma, like expressed by one of the pupils: What I think when I hear the word ‘Romlos’? Before I first met her, my teacher told me: ‘The romlos is coming’. And I didn’t understand; where does she come from? But I did not dare to ask. I was too nervous. Because ‘Romlosen’ …. Like, that has nothing to do with Roma? ‘Romlosen’? What is it really? (Girl in 7th grade) ‘Los’, the last part of the term ‘Romlos’, refers to a ‘lodesman, helping boats navigating’, and ‘Romlos’ can thus be understood as a ‘Roma pilot’. When the Romlos is non-Roma, the term indicates that Norwegians without Roma background act as pilots for the Roma, guiding them. This implies an unequal relationship, where Roma are regarded powerless and/or unable to govern or guide themselves. When the Romlos have Roma background, the term gets a more neutral meaning, and might be understood as ‘Roma who work as pilots’. These examples show how different terms can open and close different understandings of one self and others, and of the power relations between different parties working together. A central issue in the research project is how the pupils experience their contact with the service. None of the informants think it is strange that the Romlos is coming to help them at school. One informant replied: ‘I think it’s 10

In periods there has only been one mediator working in the service.

112    Kari Hagatun natural. Roma is a national minority, so…’. All the informants describe that the Romlos is helping them, even if lacking Roma background. For the pupils, a close relationship with the Romlos seems to be of uttermost importance: When I have had a bad day … If, like … I have been very noisy in class? Did I say something I shouldn’t? Then we can talk about that. […] It’s like I have a therapist! […] And I can ask her about everything, concerning everything in my life. […] She brings out the best in me and makes me the best person I can be; in a way […] I get so happy. […] She tells me that I am really smart, and I’m not used to that. At home … like … I’m not supposed to be the smartest one there. And she really explains the subjects in a way that I understand. She is the teacher of my dreams! (Girl in 7th grade) The service is still in a formative stage. Earlier, individual staffs working almost by themselves were left to find their way. Currently, the expansion of RLT has led to the development of a group of staff where different kinds of competences are represented. The most important development observed is the inclusion of staff with Roma background into the service. This has brought new knowledge into the group, and also strengthened the link to the Roma community. But, Roma mediators often experience challenges that are not experienced by their nonRoma co-workers, especially regarding how to relate to other Roma in the community (Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2015). Still there are too few Roma mediators employed in the measure who can support each other in that regard.

Concluding Remarks One can hope that RLT, currently the only educational special measure targeting Roma pupils, will be strengthened in the future by receiving the needed support and resources from the municipality. This will be crucial in order to continue to develop in a way that enable the much-needed increase of educational attainment among Roma pupils in Norway. Both the different roles, and the measure’s mandate, need to be discussed and evaluated, based on collective experiences, as well as research-based knowledge from other countries. A new action plan ought to be developed in order to give the service a clearer mandate and in order to strengthen its legitimacy. In this process Roma should be active participants, treated as equals on basis of their often informal, but still crucial, competences.

References Aarset, M. F., & Lidén, H. (2017). Historiens betydning for rom og romanifolks/tateres situasjon i dag. [The importance of history for the current situation of Roma and Romani people.] In N. Brandal, C. A. Døving, & I. Plesner (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter og urfolk i norsk politikk frå 1900 til 2016 [National minorities and

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    113 indigenous people. In Norwegian policy from 1900 to 2016] (pp. 201–217) Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roman Issues (CAHROM) (2013) Thematic report on school at-tendance of Roma children, in particular Roma girls. Version of the report endorsed by the Ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roma Issues at its 5th meeting. Strasbourg, 22 April 2013: Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/ 16800890d3. Accessed on August 14, 2017. AID (Norwegian Ministry for Work and Inclusion). (2009). Action plan for improvement of the living conditions of Roma in Oslo. Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/SAMI/Nasjmin/ Handlingsplan_rom_EN.pdf. Accessed on June 10, 2017. Bay, T. (2002). Før det er for sent: Sigøynernes livsbetingelser i Norge [Before it is too late. The life conditions of gypsies in Norway.] Hovedfagsrapport Nr. 4. Oslo, Norway: Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences. Borchgrevink, T., & Brochmann, G. (2008). Mangfold uten grenser. [Diversity without boarders.] Samtiden, 3, 22–31. Retrieved from https://www.idunn.no/samtiden/ 2008/03/mangfold_uten_grenser Brochmann, G., & Kjeldstadli, K. (2008). A history of immigration: The case of Norway 900–2000. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget. Brustad, J. A., Lien, L., & Rosvoll, M. (2017). Ekskludering. Norsk politikk overfor rom 1915–1956. [Exclusion. Norwegian policy towards Roma 1915–1956.] In N. Brandal, C. A. Døving, & I. T. Plesner (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter og urfolk i norsk politikk frå 1900 til 2016 [National minorities and indigenous people in Norwegian policy] (pp. 79–92). Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Council of Europe (CoE). (2015). Report by Nils Muiznieks, commissioner for human rights of the Council of Europe, following his visit to Norway from 19 to 23 January 2015. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/ 16806db889. Accessed on August 14, 2017. Engebrigtsen, A. (2015). Educating the Roma: The struggle for cultural autonomy in a seminomadic group in Norway. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 115–125. doi:10.17645/si.v3i5.275 Engebrigtsen, A., & Lidén, H. (2010). Å finne sin plass som minoritet: Rombefolkningen i Norge i dag. [Finding their place as a minority: The Roma population in Norway today.] In A. B. Lund & B. B. Moen (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National minorities in multicultural Norway] (pp. 199–214). Trondheim, Norway: Tapir akademiske forlag. Hagatun, K. (2013). Fremtidsdrømmer og syn på barnas kompetanse hos norske rom-mødre. [Norwegian Roma mother’s future dreams and views on childrens competences.] Master’s thesis, Department of Education, University of Bergen, Bergen. Hagatun, K. (2016, September). The educational situation for Roma pupils in Norway: Norwegian Roma parents at a crossroads? Paper presented at the 2016 annual meeting of Gypsy Lore Society and conference on Romani studies. Södertörn University, Stockholm. Hagatun, K. (2017, April). Challenging the metanarrative of the “unable and unwilling”: Norwegian Roma parents’ narratives on prioritizing education. Paper presented at the 2017 Baltic Sea conference on Romani Studies. Södertörn University, Stockholm. Hagatun, K., & Westrheim, K. (2014). “Vi klarer oss uansett – det har vi gjort i fem hundre år”: Perspektiver på utdanningssituasjonen til norske rombarn. [“We manage anyway – we have done that for five hundred years”: Perspectives on the educational situation of Norwegian Roma children]. In K. Westrheim & A. Tolo (Eds.), Kompetanse for mangfold. Om skolens rolle og utfordringer i det fler-kulturelle Norge [Expertise for diversity. About the school’s role and challenges in multicultural Norway] (pp. 243–273) Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget.

114    Kari Hagatun Hanisch, T. (1976). Om sigøynerspørsmålet. En undersøkelse av bakgrunnen for sosial konfrontasjon [About the gypsy question: Investigating reasons for social confrontation.] Oslo, Norway: Department of Social Science, University of Oslo. Hasvoll, B. (2015). “Den gode barndom” på romanes [The good childhood in Romanes]. In B. Hasvoll & I. Sigfridsson (Eds.), Ute er det kaldt. Om romer i Norge [It is cold outside. About Roma in Norway] (pp. 19–29). Oslo, Norway: Department for Roma Measures. HL-senteret (Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities). (2012). Antisemittisme i Norge? Den norske befolkningens holdninger til jøder og andre minoriteter. [Antisemitism in Norway? The attitudes of the Norwegian population towards Jews and other minorities.] Oslo, Norway: HL-senteret. Retrieved from http:// www.hlsenteret.no/publikasjoner/antisemittisme-i-norge. Accessed on July 25, 2017. Lakatosova, M. B., Lorentsen R., & Hasvoll, B. C. (2016). Romske eventyr og historier. Paramici taj cace historiji. [Roma fairytales and histories. Paramici taj cace historiji.] Riga, Latvia: Solum Forlag. Lidén, H. (1990). Vokse opp som sigøyner i Norge: sosialisering i en etnisk minoritetsgruppe. [Growing up as a gypsy in Norway: socialization in an ethnic minority group.] Magisters thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. Lidén, H. (2005). Barn og unge fra nasjonale minoriteter: En nordisk kunnskapsoversikt. [Children and adolescents from national minorities: A Nordic review.] Rapport 7. Institute for Social Research, ISF Oslo, Norway. Lidén, H., & Engebrigtsen, A. (2010). De norske rom – og deres historie. [Norwegian Roma – and their history.] In A. B. Lund & B. B. Moen (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National minorities in multicultural Norway] (pp. 87–98). Trondheim, Norway: Tapir Akademiske forlag. Liégeois, J. P. (2007). Roma in Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publishing. Matras, Y. (2005). The status of Romani in Europe. Report submitted to the Council of Europe’s Language Policy Division, October 2005. University of Manchester, School of Languages, Linguistics & Cultures. Retrieved from https://romani.humanities. manchester.ac.uk/downloads/1/statusofromani.pdf. Accessed on August 14, 2017. Mørland, C. (2017). Legislation and policy in Norway. Contribution from Norway to the Ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roma Issues, CAHROOM’s, thematic report on “School mediators”. Unpublished data. Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (NI). (2013). Parallel report from the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights related to the fifth periodic report of Norway. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. Retrieved from http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CESCR/ Shared%20DocumentsNOR/INT_CESCR_IFN_NOR_15349_E.pdf. Accessed on August 15, 2017. Norwegian Church Aid. (2017). Rapport om forprosjektet Romsk kultur- og ressurssenter: Romano Kher. [Pre-project on Roma Culture and Resource Center – Romano Kher.] Oslo, Norway: Norwegian Church Aid. Norwegian Directorate of Education. (2014). Veileder: Våre nasjonale minoriteter. Til ansatte i barnehager og skoler. [Guide: Our National Minorities. To staff in Kindergartens and Schools.] Retrieved from https://www.udir.no/globalassets/filer/ laringsmiljo/nasjonale-minoriteter/nas-jonale_minoriteter_udir.pdf. Accessed on August 15, 2017. Norwegian Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs (FAK). (2010). Tredjeperiodiskerapportom gjennomføringenaveuroparådetsramme-kon vensjon om beskyttelseavnasjonaleminoriteter. [Third report submitted by Norway pursuant to article 25, paragraph 2 of the framework convention of national minorities.] Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Retrieved from http://docplayer.me/1769438-Thirdreport-submitted-by-norway-pursuant-to-article-25-paragraph-2-of-the-frameworkconvention-for-the-protection-of-national-minorities.html. Accessed on August 14, 2017.

The Educational Situation for Roma in Norway    115 Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development. (2001). Nasjonale minoritetar i Noreg: Om statleg politikk overfor jødar, kvener, rom, romanifolket og skogfinnar. [White paper on Norwegian National Minorities: State Policy regarding Jews, Kvens, Roma, Romani People/Taters and Forest Finns.] (St.mld.15 2000/2001). Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Norwegian Ministry of Social Affairs. (1972). Om tiltak for norske sigøynere. [White paper on Measures for the Norwegian Gypsies.] (St.mld.37 1972/73). Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Olgaç, C. R., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2015). Romsk brobyggarutbildning med inriktning mot skolan 2012–2015. Högre utbildning, social mobilitet och interkulturellt capital. [Roma mediator education for teaching in schools 2012–2015. Higher education, social mobility and intercultural capital.] Stockholm: Södertörns högskola. Oslo Museum. (2015). Exhibition catalogue: Norwegiska Romá – Norwegian Gypsies. One people – many voices. Oslo, Norway: Oslo Museum. Osloskolen. (2015, May 12). Romtiltaket består av veiledningstjenesten og romlostjenesten. [Department for Roma Measures consists of mediators and “Romlos”.] Retrieved from https://skullerud.oslovo.no/fagtilbud/videregaende-opplaring/romtiltaket/. Accessed on June 10, 2017. Palosuo, L. (2008). En inventering om forskningen om Romer i Sverige. (A review of research on Roma in Sweden.] Uppsala, Sweden: Centrum for multi etnisk forskning, Uppsala University. Regjeringen.no. (2016, June 15). Voksnes rett til opplæring. [Adult’s right to education.] Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/no/tema/utdanning/voksnes_laering_ og_kompetanse/artikler/rett-tilopplaring/id213311/. Accessed on July 10, 2017. ROMLEX. (2017). Romani dialects. Retrieved from http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ dialects.xmlhttp://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/dialects.xml. Accessed on July 10, 2017. Rosvoll, M., & Bielenberg, N. (2012). Antisiganisme, stereotypier og diskriminering av Rom. [Antiziganism, stereotypes and discrimination of Roma.] HL-senterets temahefte nr.14. Oslo: Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities. Retrieved from http://www.hlsenteret.no/publikasjoner/digitale-hefter/pdf/hl_temahefte_14_ digital.pdf. Accessed on August 14, 2017. Rosvoll, M., Lien, L., & Brustad J. A. (2015). «Å bli dem kvit». Utviklingen av en «sigøynerpolitikk» og utryddelsen av norske Rom. [«Å bli dem kvit». The development of a «gypsy policy» and the extermination of Norwegian Roma.] Oslo, Norway: Center for Studies of Holocaust and Religious Minorities. Retrieved from http://www. hlsenteret.no/aktuelt/2015/a_bli_dem_kvit_hl_senteretpdf_lavoppl.pdf. Accessed on July 10, 2017. Schall, V. (2017). Språk, identitet og minoritetspolitikk. [Language, identity and minority policy.] In N. Brandal, C. A. Døving, & I. Plesner (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter og urfolk i norsk politikk frå 1900 til 2016 [National minorities and indigenous people in Norwegian policy from 1900 to 2016] (pp. 219–235). Oslo, Norway: Cappelen Damm Akademisk. Selvhjelp for innvandrere og flyktninger (SEIF). (2011). En plass i samfunnet – også for meg? [A place in society – also for me?] Rapport mars 10 – mars 11. SEIF, Oslo, Norway. Retrieved from http://www. seif.no/En/rapport/. Accessed on August 14, 2017. Simon, P. (2007). “Ethnic” statistics and data protection in the Council of Europecountries. Study Report. Institut National d’Etudes Démographiques, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/activities/ themes/Ethnic_statistics_and_data_protection.pdf. Accessed on June 10, 2017. Simonsen. (2011). Utredning om forholdet mellom nasjonal og internasjonal rett på op-plæringsområdet for romfolket. På oppdrag fra Utdanningsdirektoratet. [An investigation of the relationship between international and national legislation on Norwegian Roma’s educational rights. On commission from Ministry of Education.]

116    Kari Hagatun Oslo, Norway: Simonsen Law. Retrieved from http://www.nrk.no/contentfile/ file/1.8032266!simonsen-utredning.pdf. Accessed on August 14, 2017. Statistics Norway. (2013a, June 28). Adult education. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/ utdanning/statistikker/vol2. Accessed on August 27, 2017. Statistics Norway. (2013b, October 8). Survey of adult skills, 2011–2012. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/utdanning/statistikker/piaac27 (Accessed August 10, 2017). Statistics Norway. (2017, June 15). Educational attainment of the population. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/utdanning/statistikker/utniv. Accessed on August 27, 2017. Teichmann, M. (2001). History of the Vlach-Roma. ROMBASE. Didactically edited information on Roma. Retrieved from http://rombase.uni-graz.at/cd/data/hist/modern/ data/vlach.en.pdf. Accessed on August 14, 2017. The Department for Roma Measures. (2012). Rapport 2011. [Report 2011.] Oslo, Norway: Voksenopplæring Skullerud, Utdanningsetaten. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML). (1993). Strasbourg 5.XI.1992: Council of Europe. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/en/web/ conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/0900001680695175. Accessed on August 15, 2017. The European Council. (1995, February). The European councils Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of 1. Strasbourg, France: The European Council. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/ rms/090000168007cdac. Accessed on August 10, 2017. The Ombudsman for Children. (2010). Handlingsplan for rombefolkningen: Manglende barneperspektiv. [Actionplan for improvement of the living conditions of Roma – A lack of childrens perspective.] Letter to the Norwegian Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs, Department of Sami and Minority Affairs, 7/4-2010. Retrieved from http://fido.nrk.no/9246ca5c3b4caa30df0c75ee09ef 940d1111a857fc4a003b1f8fc2fc474ae2f2/Ombud-handlpl.pdf. Accessed on June 10, 2017. Tyldum, G., & Friberg, J. H. (2014). Et skritt påveien. Evaluering av Handlingsplan for å bedre levekårene blant rom i Oslo (Vol. 50). [First step: Evaluation of the action plan to improve the living conditions of Roma in Oslo.] FAFO report. FAFO, Oslo, Norway. UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). (2013). Concluding Observations on the fifth periodic report of Norway, 13 December, E/C.12/NOR/ CO/5. Retrieved from http://www.refworld.org/docid/52d53eb34.html. Accessed on June 10, 2017. United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2016). Human developments report. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/NOR. Accessed on June 11, 2017. Westrheim, K., & Hagatun, K. (2015). Hva betyr “kompetanse for mangfold” iutdanningssystemet? Et kritisk perspektiv på mangfolddiskursen. [What does “competence for diversity” mean in the education system? A critical perspective on the diversity discourse.] Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 3, 168–180.

Chapter 6

The Roma Population in Portugal: A Changing Picture Pedro Calado, Liliana José Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos Abstract In this chapter the authors portray the situation of the Roma population in Portugal as a changing picture. They present a description of the social situation and living conditions of the Roma people of Portugal through the systematisation of the main results obtained from research conducted recently as part of the ‘Strategy for the integration of Roma communities 2013–2020’ and give a detailed analysis of the educational dimension in various levels of education, highlighting a public policy created in 2016, the Operational Program for the Promotion of Education. This programme, inspired by a civil society project and converted into a public policy due to its innovative character, supports Roma students in higher education and is funded by the Office of the High Commissioner for Migration. The authors describe the Roma Communities in Portugal with special regard to their social situation, their culture and language. Then the authors present an analysis about the educational attainment of the Roma in Portugal and the most important policies and support programmes for Roma education, which are considered as the key to the social integration of Roma communities. Finally, they describe some successful programmes: the OPRE, RESCUR and Dreams Teens Programs. Keywords: Portugal; Roma people; Strategy for the integration of Roma communities 2013–2020; OPRE Program; RESCUR Program; Dreams Teens Program

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 117–137 Copyright © 2020 by Pedro Calado, Liliana José Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191011

118    Pedro Calado et al.

Introduction This chapter aims to present a description of the social situation and living conditions of the Roma people of Portugal through the systematisation of the main results obtained from research conducted recently as part of the ‘Strategy for the integration of Roma communities 2013–2020’ (Resolution of the Council of Ministers No. 25/2013, ACIDI, 2013). It aims to present a more detailed analysis of the educational dimension in various levels of education, highlighting a public policy created in 2016, the Operational Program for the Promotion of Education (OPRE). This programme, inspired by a civil society project and converted into a public policy due to its innovative character, supports Roma students in higher education and is funded by the Office of the High Commissioner for Migration. The reality that we are dealing with is plural and it is characterised by continuities being in constant change. Thus, we will seek to gather clues that may constitute a valid starting point for knowledge of Portuguese Roma communities, underlining the internal diversity and heterogeneity in a spatial, economic, cultural, social, relational and symbolic perspective. This crucial concern stems from the need to counteract the reproduction of homogenised and crystallised visions of Portuguese Roma people and families.

The Roma Communities in Portugal The constitutional principle of non-discrimination (Article 13 of the Portuguese Constitution) prevents the production of demographic and statistical data that would enable us to have a precise picture of the size and spatial distribution of people and Roma families in Portugal. Still, the estimation of the number, location and geographic distribution of the Portuguese Roma population resident throughout the national territory is very relevant knowledge for the design and implementation of public policies.

Roma Numbers and Distribution In 2016, the Roma Communities Observatory, an integrated research unit of the High Commissioner for Migration, identified 37,089 Portuguese Roma men and women living in Portugal, concluding that the Portuguese Roma population represents approximately 0.4% of the total population (compared to Portuguese residents 10,401,0631) (Sousa & Moreira, 2017). The results obtained by the Roma Communities Observatory constitute further fieldwork developed by the research team from the ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ (Mendes, Magano, & Candeias, 2014), which was unable to get responses from 129 municipalities of continental Portugal and 30 municipalities in the autonomous regions of Madeira and Azores. Thus it was possible for the first time in our country’s history to represent the entire territory, based on the data provided by the 1

In the present analysis, the reference time unit was the year of 2014 (Source: INE and PORDATA, reference year: 2014).

The Roma Population in Portugal    119 308 municipalities (100% response rate to the questionnaire sent), in the period between April 2014 and March 2016. The data which informs our global image of the size, location and distribution of the Portuguese Roma population, which most likely under represents the true size of the population, helps us to analyse the ethnic group on various analytical levels with multiple scales. Some previous research has also made important contributions to the knowledge of the reality in focus (Castro, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2013; SOS Racismo, 2011). Yet, it has been verified that it has never been possible to have an image of the national territory based on 100% responses of the Portuguese municipalities, without the use of combined data samples. When we look at the location of the Portuguese Roma population in the national territory, including the Azores and Madeira Islands, it turns out that it is distributed in Portugal in an unequal way. Given that 101 Portuguese municipalities (32.8%) revealed that they knew nothing of the existence of Roma people residing in their territory (the distribution of the Portuguese population resident by the remaining 207 municipalities (67.2%) is represented in Figs. 6.1 and 6.2). These maps allow us to capture scattering indicators of the Portuguese Roma population in the North, Center and South of Portugal, a weak insularity, as well as notable contrasts between the coast and interior, as well as between the urban and the rural. It is worth mentioning that there are large Roma populations living on the coast (in terms of absolute numbers), in territories with higher population density, but there are also higher percentages of Roma people living in the interior and boarder areas in comparison to non-Roma. Fig. 6.3 highlights the Portuguese municipalities with higher rates of Roma residents, both in absolute and relative terms. The municipalities of Elvas, Estremoz and Moura have not only a high number of Roma, but Roma residents represent a large portion of the total resident population. When we look at the information illustrated on Fig. 6.1, we can see that the largest number of Roma people is identified in the North (9,315), particularly in the metropolitan area of Porto (3,654), Center (9,089) and in the Lisbon Metropolitan area (9,051). Although Alentejo (6,921) and Algarve (2,614) present a more reduced number of Roma people, these two units have a higher representation of Roma within their territory vis-á-vis the total resident population, 0.94% and 0.59% respectively. It is also worth mentioning the low representation of Roma residents in the autonomous regions of Madeira and Azores.

Picture(s) of the Roma Population of Portugal: Social Situation National research, qualitative and micro-level, in well-defined geographical areas and neighbourhoods, has revealed that the Portuguese Roma are particularly vulnerable to poverty and social exclusion. These data show the existence of poor housing conditions, low levels of schooling, and discriminatory situations, practices and behaviours. Several international studies also confirm these trends. For example, a survey conducted in 2011 by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2012) in 11 member states revealed that 80% of Roma

120    Pedro Calado et al.

Fig. 6.1:  Portuguese Roma by Municipality (Absolute Numbers). Source: Observatório das Comunidades Ciganas 2018 (in Collaboration of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the University of Porto). surveyed belonged to households at risk of poverty. Even so, in Portugal the Roma population present a diverse range of living conditions, although in most cases little is known about the differences between Roma elites, the middle classes and the lower class. The diversity of lifestyles comes from gender, age, type of economic activity, levels of education, type of accommodation and living conditions, as well as religious, civic, political and/or associative participation of Roma individuals. However, ‘this plurality is not always easy to apprehend and understand by the obfuscation generated through the adoption of reductive, linear and deterministic interpretative perspectives about the Portuguese Roma’ (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 17). This section seeks to present a general portrait of Roma communities in Portugal. It highlights the diversity and the process of social change that the Roma population is currently carrying out. It is based on the analysis

The Roma Population in Portugal    121

Fig. 6.2:  Portuguese Roma by Municipality (Relative Numbers). Source: Observatório das Comunidades Ciganas 2018 (in Collaboration of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the University of Porto). of the results of the survey conducted in the context of the ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ (Mendes et al., 2014), between April and July 2014, with 1,599 people and Roma families2 residing in Continental Portugal, specifically in 68 municipalities (coverage of all continental districts). 2

‘The survey to Roma people was addressed to a representative of the household (aged 16 or over) and covered a number of issues that allowed some basic characteristics of the respondent’s household to be known (one survey per household); the remaining questions were addressed to the respondent’ (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 27). ‘The application of the surveys allowed to gather information on 6,809 people, including the 1,599 respondents. Regarding the distribution of the individuals that constitute the aggregates by gender, it was verified that 48.7% are women and 51% are men’ (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 168).

122    Pedro Calado et al.

Fig. 6.3:  Top 20 Cities with the Highest Number of Portuguese Roma. Source: Observatório das Comunidades Ciganas 2018 (in Collaboration of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the University of Porto). Starting with the labour market, in particular the main sources of maintenance of the individual respondents and their households, the ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ reveals that these are mainly translated in family support (34.3% and 33.8%, respectively) and the Social Integration Income (34.8% and 33.5%, respectively). The other sources are work (9.5% and 9.1%, respectively) and residually on pension/retirement (3.9% and 3.8%, respectively), temporary allowances and social support (3% and 1.8%, respectively) and casual work (1.8% and 1.7%, respectively), being also noted the occurrence of gender differences and territorial imbalances. In this sense, ‘work’ is a source of income, especially for men (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 189). Work as the main source of income has a special focus on the region of Large Lisbon Area/Lisboa e Vale do Tejo, where it represents 26.3% of the source of income. In the other

The Roma Population in Portugal    123 regions, the work collects a maximum of 13.1% of the responses (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 186). Crossing the sources of income with schooling, we observed that, among those who work, the majority have completed the 1st and the 2nd cycle, 6 years of schooling (4.5%), and only a small part finished the third cycle, 9 years of schooling, or more (2.0%). (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 186) In turn, about half of those who receive the Social Integration Income, or temporary allowances, which are borne by the family and do odd jobs, did not attended or have not yet completed the first cycle. (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 186) The trend occurring in households is repeated at an individual level, since jobs go primarily to those who have finished a school degree (59.9%). It should be noted that approximately 30% of those who have secondary education or more depend on ‘work’, while the remaining 31.7% are dependent on family. A large proportion of those who receive pension, retirement, temporary allowances and social support can’t read nor write. (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 189) The relationship between the working condition and education is relevant here. Thus, higher levels of education are associated with greater likelihood of inclusion in the labour market, a fundamental dimension in the process of social integration of Roma communities. When analysing the condition related with the economic activity of the Roma respondents, it is verified that 18% is active with profession/work and 57% is unemployed. It is worth mentioning that there is a significant gender gap among respondents: More men are in situation of professional activity, unemployment, invalidity, retirement and studying, while women are more engaged in household chores and never worked. The professions most often mentioned by respondents are itinerant trading stands (14.0%), followed by the agricultural work (3.0%), domestic services (1.1%), trade (0.7%) and work in civil construction (0.6%). On the other hand, the most often common profession is self-employed without employees (23%), and salaried employment (15.8% of responses). Again, is verified a predominance of men’s answers. It should be noted that only 1% of men report being self-employed with employees, especially in the case of itinerant trading. If we consider the situation of the unemployed Roma, 66.3% didn’t look for work in the last three weeks. The reasons for this situation are: nobody gives work to a Roma person (29.1%), lack of time (24.4%) and not having appropriate school qualifications (13.4%). These data show that ethnic discrimination still exists in Portugal and the importance of school qualifications as a passport to the labour market. To tackle these obstacles, we

124    Pedro Calado et al. have highlighted three priorities for the national strategy which seem essential in the Employment and Training Axis: ‘Promote access to employment and the creation of own job’; ‘Increase the professional qualifications for labour market integration’; and ‘Revitalise the traditional activities of Roma communities for their social and professional integration’. Regarding the accommodation and living conditions of Roma individuals, the ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ concludes that predominantly, respondents say that they live in classical type housing, i.e. apartments and houses (66.6%), with a non-negligible percentage claiming to live in tents, rudimentary or wooden houses (27.5%). In more residuals proportions are the situations of people living in parts of houses (2.1%) or in caravans (1.5%). This is a very high percentage of people who declare to experience housing situations marked by precariousness and insalubrity. (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 193) Another study, ‘Characterization of the housing conditions of Roma communities resident in Portugal’, developed by the Institute for Housing and Urban Rehabilitation (Ferreira, 2014) and that is also part of the National Strategy, in Axis 5 – Housing, in Priority 26 – ‘Improve the knowledge of the housing situation of Roma communities’, presents quantitative data of individuals, families and accommodations by municipality. The fact that 14,754 roma families (48%) live in social housing seems to be especially relevant to the characterisation of the housing conditions of Roma communities in Portugal. It accounts for an occupation of 3% of all existing social housing in Portugal (3,516 households, according to National Statistics Institute). Furthermore, 2,461 families (32%) live in non-classic dwellings (tent, camp or mobile housing), which corresponds to a value of 37% of total non-classical housing in Portugal (2,441, according to data from the National Statistics Institute) (Ferreira, 2014). It has been determined that social housing is the sole form of housing for Roma families living in 27 municipalities. In 18 municipalities it was found that a percentage between 75% and 98% of the Roma population lives in social housing, in 22 municipalities between 50% and 74%, and in 27 municipalities up to 49%. The social housing in certain municipalities are dominated by Roma. There are approximately 2,500 Roma families living in non-classical accommodation and they all need to be relocated. For this, it is essential to identify and implement territorial measures that are able to give a response to this scenario, keeping in mind that ‘the reality presents certainly larger needs to those here identified’ (Ferreira, 2014, p. 14). A total of 35 municipalities stood out as having more than 25 Roma families living in non-classical dwellings. In 26 municipalities, all families live in non-­ classical housing. In turn, 14 municipalities have values ranging from 76% to 99% of non-classic households (Ferreira, 2014). Two important conclusions are uncovered by this study. On the one hand, it highlights the strong presence of Roma families in public social rental housing, when considering the Portuguese Roma population as a whole. Even so, this representation is not so significant if we take the entire Portuguese population living

The Roma Population in Portugal    125 in this type of accommodation into consideration. On the other hand, over 2,461 Roma families living in non-classical housing are waiting for housing responses from the government. A lack of proper housing affects various dimensions of life including education, job placement and health. The social integration of Roma suffers when the people are not given appropriate housing. It is also important to consider qualitative aspects which influence access to housing and the living conditions of Roma individuals. This is the case of the typologies and the number of elements per accommodation, territorial location, the quality of building materials, the community environments and spaces of the neighbourhood, the accessibility, the infrastructures, the equipment and the surrounding public spaces, and the rental problems in the private market, among others. The identification and implementation of measures to ensure a response to the specific needs of each location, socially adjusted to Roma individuals (and families) marked by poverty, social exclusion, stigmatisation, segregation and poor housing conditions, are decisive for their integration. The National Strategy contemplates the strengthening of practices that promote access to housing and integration, the adequacy of the housing responses, the qualification of the relocation spaces and the promotion of access to rental market/private property. In this context, we stress the general goals of ‘adoption of intercultural mediation as an integration facilitation strategy of Roma communities in 60% of social housing neighbourhoods, until 2020’ and the ‘promotion of minimum conditions of hygiene and well-being in 80% of camps until the relocation of the families, by 2020’. Given the different forms of social and spatial integration exposed, it seems equally relevant to emphasise that the majority of Portuguese Roma living in the national territory are sedentary. This contrasts with the wide spread social representation that the Roma are nomads. In fact, ‘those who maintain some form of itinerancy are cases forced by impossibility of territorial attachment (Castro, 2007)’ (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 13). An important dimension to better understand Roma communities relates to the health area that integrates topics such as access to health care and services, eating habits, contraceptive methods, vaccination and the existence of diseases or health problems in the household. Just as the monitoring of the National Strategy indicates, access to healthcare and the relationship between the health services and the Roma communities is limited. This information is confirmed by data collected by the National Study: (a) around 92% indicate that all elements of their household have a GP/family doctor; (b) 66.5% goes to pharmacies, weekly or monthly; (c) 50.5% is seen by the GP/family doctor weekly or monthly; and (d) trips to private doctors are scarce. As mentioned before, some of the Roma communities face significant social vulnerabilities. In this scope, it is important to highlight some data on the levels of deprivation experienced by this population, including not having enough food. In this sense, about 48% indicated starving, of which 18.6% starved 1–2 times a year, 13.7% between 1 and 2 times a month, and 15.8% state that they were often hungry. Once again there is a correlation between social vulnerability and schooling, that is, deprivation of enough food tends to be more common among the less educated individuals, in the lowest tier (can’t read nor write). Among this group, almost a quarter of the subjects (24%) say that they ‘often got hungry’.

126    Pedro Calado et al. Segmentation by age also demonstrates that it is in the older age group, over 65 years, that the most extreme situation is observed: 46% report starving at least once or twice a month. To overcome moments of deprivation, the main strategy is to enlist family support (28.8% of respondents), followed by the support of institutions and neighbours (19.6% and 15.9% of the cases). Other strategies, such as asking for help from the church pastor, social worker or other Roma families, asking for credit, pledging or selling goods from home and relying on local support organisations, were also mentioned. When asked about the use of contraceptive methods, more than one-third of the respondents reported to be frequent users (39.5%). The most recurrent among these, especially in women, are: the pill (47.8%), followed by intrauterine device (13.3%), implant (12%), condoms (9.5%), injection (7.1%) and tubal sterilisation (6.8%). With regard to immunisation, 71.3% of individuals with children under the age of 18 years have their vaccines updated. Of those who don’t have it, the main reasons for this are: (a) forgetfulness, (b) fear and (c) lack of time. Finally, referring to the health of the household members, the individuals mentioned a set of diseases, including respiratory, blood and cardiovascular disease and obesity. The prevalence of respiratory diseases appears to be caused by the precariousness of living conditions, particularly of habitability (Vicente, 2009) in which a significant percentage of Roma people still live. The citizenship, social and political participation dimensions is residual among Roma communities. The data collected under the National Study show that 7.9% (127 cases) of the respondents indicated that they were part of some association or exercised some voluntary activity. This participation tends to be more recurrent among respondents with education levels higher than the third cycle (18% of affirmative answers in this range) and between the ages of 35 and 44 (12% in this range). Given the region of residence, the association is more present in Large Lisbon Area/Lisboa and Vale do Tejo area (13%). The electoral act is however valued by a larger part of this population. In the last municipal elections, 38.1% reported having voted, 8.1% indicated that they were not registered, against 53.3% who did not vote. Electoral participation tends to be more frequent among males (44.5% vs. 33.9%) with less education (can’t read nor write), aged 35 and older and in the Algarve region. Regarding religious beliefs, it was observed that more than 50% of the respondents are evangelicals (both from the Philadelphia Evangelical Church and from other Churches such as the Assembly of God and Christ for All). To a large extent, Roma individuals take part daily or weekly in the religious practices (53.1%). A dimension of analysis that helps to understand the socio-economic situation of Roma communities is the relations between Roma and non-Roma. The data from the National Study show that the relations between the respondents and non-Roma people are diversified. These relations are established predominantly in the neighbourhood (77.2%), centred in leisure and recreation (52.0%) and, particularly in trips to the bar/coffee shop (45.0%). There is also about one-third of respondents who maintain relations with non-Roma in shopping and mutual help contexts (due to adverse situations such as death, unemployment and illness),

The Roma Population in Portugal    127 inviting each other to visit one another’s homes and in contexts of business and work. To a lesser extent are those who relate in weddings and other parties. Those who maintain marital relations with non-Roma individuals are a minority. A given relevant data is that the higher the education level, the higher are the ‘average levels’ of relations with ‘non-Roma’. The group between 35 and 45 years old presents higher levels of relations, while the group with the least extended social relationships is the group of the older individuals. Thus, the younger and more educated are the ones that present higher levels of relationships and proximity to the non-Roma, indicating that the process of interaction and social integration is growing exponentially. A theme which is essential to approach is ethnic discrimination. The process of discrimination awareness and prevention already has a vast work in Portugal. Still, the National Survey data shows that this is far from ending. About 60% report that they have already felt discriminated against, which is in line with the results of other studies (Bastos, 2012). In general, the most common situations of discrimination identified are in supermarkets or shops, public services (social security, immigrants support organisation, finance), in job interviews, in cafés/restaurants and health centers/hospitals (above 15%), at school and in training contexts or the rental of a house/room (between 14% and 17%), among others. This perception is also related to the education level. In the group of subjects without schooling, the ratio of people who have felt discriminated against and those who felt that they had not experienced these kinds of situations, is almost 50/50%. This ratio increases in people with schooling until the first cycle to 65%, confirming experiences of ethnic and racial discrimination, and in the last range of education reaches 72%. A greater awareness of what makes up a situation of discrimination may explain these different ratios in relation to a higher education levels. Regarding the way they evaluate their personal and familial standard of living, in comparison to their surroundings, other Roma families, and society in general, 57.2% of the respondents consider themselves poor, although 29.9% consider themselves to be in a normal/average situation. At the extremes, we find 10.4% who claim to live in misery and 1.8% indicating to live well. No replies were registered in the ‘rich’ option. Again, there is a correlation between this evaluation and the education level and age. As the respondent rises in the schooling scale, the likelihood of assessing their situation as average increases. There is a general trend in terms of age, whereby increasing age is tied to a less favourable assessment of standard of living. These correlations set the stage for a growing and promising social integration process, that is, the more educated and younger, the better. When the comparison is made to their parents, the results are very diverse. The highest proportion indicates that it is better now (37%), while others say it is equal to what it was (30.1%) and some say it is worse now (31.7%).

Culture and Language/s Roma culture is often a dimension that shapes the processes and relational dynamics of Roma communities. The Roma culture presents a set of values that

128    Pedro Calado et al. are rooted in their attitudes and individual and collective practices. Some of the aspects most valued by Roma communities, according to the National Study, are: the respect for elders, the purity (virginity) of women, followed by the wedding according to the Roma law, and the Roma law itself, with practices and values assuming great significance in their social identities (Mendes et al., 2014). With greater prominence, above 50%, there is the Roma law, mourning and cult of the dead, and the mutual help, that is, help in situations of revenge, death, illness and other difficulties. Other customs which were mentioned such as speaking the Roma language, participating in Roma traditions and listening to traditional Roma music, marrying within the Roma community, practicing the itinerant sale, girls and women focussing their attention on children and respecting others, as well as other customs and values. In this scope, the National Study (Mendes et al., 2014) also revealed that the gender differences are still an important element in Roma culture. For instance, more than 50% of the respondents agreed with the following sentences: ‘Men should make the most important family decisions’, ‘Women with shame should not attend certain locations without husband’s presence’, ‘A widow must shave the hair and practice deep mourning (wear black, not listen to music, not watch television, not drink alcohol, etc.)’, ‘Boys should continue in school until later than girls’. Still, it is also worth mentioning that the majority of the respondents stated as well that ‘women should have the same rights and treatment as men’. On the other hand, only a minority agrees that ‘Women should not discuss family matters with their husbands, if they are not of the same opinion’ (39.8%) and that ‘Boys are more important than girls’ (21.1%). The Roma language (Romanó/Romanon/Caló) is spoken daily or more than once a week by about 50% of the respondents, but also a high proportion (40%) reports that they rarely or never speak the Roma language. The remaining 10% indicate speaking it between once a week and once a month. These differences in the frequency with which the Roma language is spoken appear to remain between men and women, as well as considering the different levels of education. The youngest seem to be those who speak more frequently, with a high incidence in the Algarve region (61.7%), followed by the central region (56.2%) and North (48.1%); the lowest values are recorded in Large Lisbon Area/Lisboa e Vale do Tejo/ (36.3%) and in Alentejo (23%).

Roma in the Education System in Portugal Educational Attainment of the Roma in Portugal Regarding education and training dimensions, we highlight the existence of significant structural deficits in literacy, education and qualification of the Portuguese Roma population. Besides, these inequalities in access (and success) to education and training provisions are also reality. According to the National Study (Mendes et al., 2014), if we look at the distribution of household elements by highest levels of schooling completed, 27.6% of the population can neither read or write;

The Roma Population in Portugal    129 4.9% can read and write without ever attending school; 19.6% didn’t complete the first cycle; 44.2% completed up to the third cycle of basic education (23% – 1st cycle; 13.9% – 2nd cycle; and 7.3% – 3rd cycle); 2.3% completed secondary education; 0.5% completed high school level or higher (Candeias, 2016). Gender and intergenerational inequalities are well noted in this context. On the one hand, it is noted that Roma women have lower education levels than men, ‘being rare the cases that go beyond the basic education (1st cycle)’ (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 172). On the other hand, most children up to five years of age attend preschool. In the following age group prevails the frequency of the first cycle. Young people between 10 and 14 years attend, especially the 1st and 2nd cycles, with a minor presence in the 3rd cycle. The young people between 15 and 19 years represent the largest percentage of people in the 3rd cycle and secondary education. Finally, a large proportion of older individuals, over 50 years, can neither read nor write. In this scope, the ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ also reveals the existence of geographic asymmetries regarding schooling levels. Yet, what stands out in all the Portuguese territory is the widespread prevalence of low educational and professional qualifications. Even so, this is a changing reality, as can be seen by the data relating to children and young people. It is important to point out that more than half of the respondents have children and/or grandchildren who attend school (57.5%). There is, however, a significant proportion (14.7%) who reports that their children and/or grandchildren did not attend school or abandoned it before compulsory schooling. The arguments for these situations are: they have already learned the necessary, they can learn at home, stay unemployed anyway, and also due to situations like engagement, marriage, pregnancy, parenting or having to take care of siblings. Regarding attendance and school support to the children and/or grandchildren in charge of Roma individuals surveyed: 53.6% mention that, when they receive a message to go to school, they act accordingly; 53.6% reveals that children and/ or grandchildren like the school; 52.2% indicates that children and/or grandchildren like the teachers; and 54.5% referred that their children and/or grandchildren like the coexistence with the other school members. These data show a clear change in the relation with the school and its valuation by the Roma families. This is very important to break the stereotype that the Roma population devalues the inclusion and academic trajectory. Within this scope, according to the respondents, ‘it would be important to have Roma teachers and staff ’ (89.6%); ‘the boys should remain longer in school than they usually do’ (88.1%); and ‘everyone must attend school until at least the 12th grade’ (74.9%). However, for girls only 60.3% agree that they should stay in school longer than they usually do (Mendes et al., 2014, p. 206). Nevertheless, it is a significant percentage that values the female academic trajectory. This contradicts the notion that most of the Roma population reproves this idea, which is generally an issue between the Roma population and the education and social work staff. The fact that 31.8% of Roma respondents assume that there are adult elements of their households who have developed projects to return to school reinforces, as well, the importance given to the school.

130    Pedro Calado et al. Policies and Support Programs for Roma Education According to the characterisation of the educational situation of Portuguese Roma, several priorities listed in the ‘National Strategy for the integration of Roma communities’ (ACIDI, 2013), education axis, are decisive. These are some of those prioritised goals: ‘Ensure access to Preschool Education’, ‘Increase enrolment rates, ensuring that all Roma children complete compulsory education’, ‘Promote continuity to secondary level schooling, encouraging higher education’, ‘Prevent early school leaving’, ‘Ensure access to lifelong learning’, ‘Promote the training of educational agents in the diversity of Roma culture, with the participation of these communities as trainers and privileged interlocutors’, and ‘Promote the combat against illiteracy’. Some policies are established in order to support these priorities. For instance, a significant proportion of Roma benefits from school social support due to the socio-economic vulnerability of many households. A percentage of 79.1% benefits from the School Social Action Services (SASE), particularly meals (47.3%), books (41.0%) and school material (35.8%). It is noted that more than half of these beneficiaries are also covered by Social Integration Income. The Social Integration Income, as a social universal policy measure, is a provision included in the solidarity subsystem and insertion program envisioning the assurance of resources to persons and their households that meet their minimum needs and to favor a progressive social, labor and community inclusion. (Decree-Law No. 90/2017 of 28 July) In 2009, approximately 6.4% of Roma people take advantage of this policy, which is a residual value concerning the universe of beneficiaries of this measure (Castro, 2010). In this respect, it should be noted that the Social Integration Income represents an important contribution to the process of social integration of the Roma. It enhances access and school attendance of children and young Roma and promotes the process of training and qualification of adults. Within the measures implemented under the National Strategy, the OPRE is a public flagship programme for the integration process of the Roma communities through education. It consists of an integration support programme and monitoring of young Roma in higher education that we will explore in the next topic.

Education: The Key to the Social Integration of Roma Communities – The OPRE, RESCUR and Dreams Teens Programs The OPRE, RESCUR and Dreams Teens are three different programmes aiming at positive youth development, especially of the ones that face discrimination, lack of opportunities or are more vulnerable. Targeting different groups, from kindergarten children to university students, these programmes bear in mind the role that education and social participation plays in personal and social wellbeing and life success.

The Roma Population in Portugal    131 The OPRE Program.  The OPRE is a joint initiative of the High Commission for Migration (through the Program ‘Choices’/ESCOLHAS), the Nomadic Letters Association and the Portuguese Youth Network for Equal Opportunities between Women and Men. Its purpose is to attenuate the existing barriers between Roma communities and the formal education system. It provides – starting from the academic year 2016/2017 – 25 scholarships for Roma students in higher education and a set of training measures, tutoring and accompanying fellows and their families. The OPRE Program recipients are Roma people residing in the national territory, with economic deprivation, enrolled and attending subjects/ courses of a bachelor’s and/or master’s degree in public, private or cooperative higher education institutions. It intends to support the continuation of studies and to prevent their early withdrawal. The OPRE Program is considered quite innovative in Portugal. It is a public policy that arises from the recognition, by the XXI constitutional Government, of good results achieved by project Opré Chavalé, promoted by the Portuguese Platform for human women rights, in partnership with the Nomadic Letters Association, with the co-financing of the Active Citizenship Program Grants (European Economic Area Financial Mechanism), and managed by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. The innovation refers to: (1) the fact that the design and implementation of Opré Chavalé is the responsibility of civil society organisations (one of these organisations is a Roma association); (2) establishes itself as a pioneering intervention strategy; and (3) is based on the needs of our country as well as in good practices already tested in other countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, such as the Roma Educational Fund and the Open Society Foundation measures. As mentioned before, the ‘National Strategy for the integration of Roma communities’ in the axis of education stresses the importance of disclosure and knowledge of successful integration experiences and school success. In this sense, the OPRE Program represents a unique contribution in the promotion of schooling continuity in primary and secondary education level, encouraging higher education. The project Opré Chavalé (name derived from the Romani, meaning ‘Raise you young people’) supported a pilot group of 15 Roma individuals (9 men and 6 women) who applied, in 2015, to higher education. It led to the attribution of eight university scholarships to young people from Roma communities who entered in higher education in the academic year of 2015/2016, with the involvement of the Choices Program in this dynamic on February 2016, through the signing of a protocol with the Nomadic Letters Association. Because of the work carried out by this association since its beginning, its President believes that ‘the attitudes of Roma communities towards school and education are changing. Boys, girls and their families are increasingly aware that education is the key to changing their future. They are still roma if they continue to study but that way they can build a career and a better future for their family and community’, to which the Vice-President added: ‘The Opré Chavalé develops in these young participants the ability to replicate their examples and models in their communities’. In addition, the coordinator of the project states that ‘the young Roma in Portugal have also the motivation

132    Pedro Calado et al. to study and, if they were given the opportunity, they can achieve their dreams and change their world’ (Baranyai & Kiss, 2016). The OPRE Program emerged in this context, providing continuity to the previous project, coming into action in the 2016/2017 school year.3 It encompasses the reimbursement of the cost inherent to higher education studies by individuals from Roma communities, expenditure on tuition fees, school supplies and travel, as well as the implementation of a training programme and specialised technical support, focussing on awareness and family and community mediation, and individual tutoring and mentoring among students. The training programme consists of four residential meetings, two days each, with the presence of the students and a family escort, whenever requested, to foster the personal and scholastic success of scholarship holders. The following conditions are necessary in order to achieve this goal: the acquisition of soft skills required for success in higher education; specific training for the challenges inherent to higher education; empowerment, personal development and gender equality; the exploitation of Roma identity and facilitating conciliation with new identity elements; group cohesion and mobilisation for the reinforcement of the Roma activists for education movement. The population covered by the OPRE Program consists of 11 men and 13 women, aged between 18 and 39 years (at application time), with an average of 27 years (18–19 years – 4 individuals; 20–24 years – 10; 25–29 years – 3; 30–34 years – 1; 35–39 years – 6). They come from 19 municipalities, located in the North (9), Center (8) and South (7). Regarding the higher education institutions, most students attend Polytechnics (14), followed by Public Universities (5), Private Universities (3) and Teaching Cooperatives (2). As for the frequency of higher education schemes, 11 individuals are internal students (enrolled in the graduate/master’s cycle), 11 attend individual curricular units included in the courses and two individuals are students of higher technical professional courses. The scientific domain of the courses and cycles of studies in which the students predominantly are enrolled is Social Sciences and Humanities (19), Life and Sport Sciences (1) and the Exact and Engineering Sciences (2) are also represented. The distribution of students in the different courses is the following: Social Work (4), Social Education (4), Socio-educational Animation (6), Sociology (1), Community Development, Photography (1), Sport (1), Naval Automation (1) and Food Quality and Safety (1). The mid-term review of the OPRE Program reveals some strengths that have stood out: the existence of sponsors supporting academic pathways in their difficulties and needs; study support; the 964 hours of training that took place until June 2017 with three formative meetings; the relevance of the themes addressed in these training meetings; the conviviality; the mutual help; group spirit, unity and cohesion; mediation and connection to communities; the mobilisation/

3

In terms of timeline, the deadline for submission of student applications ran from 20 October 2016 to 4 November 2016, and the results were released by ACM on 9 November 2016.

The Roma Population in Portugal    133 collective involvement around Roma education and activism, and finally, the generalised academic success of the young people who took part of the programme. The RESCUR Program.  In this scope, another programme that is being implemented in Portugal is RESCUR: A resilience curriculum for early years and elementary schools in Europe (Cefai, Miljević-Riđički et al., 2015). The programme aims to give tools for the children to overcome challenges and risks successfully through the promotion of resilience factors that support a positive trajectory. RESCUR was developed collaboratively among six partner countries: Malta, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Sweden under a project funded by the European commission, as a universal programme developed to promote competences related with resilience, but with a special attention to vulnerable groups such as children with disabilities, special educational needs, refugees and children from minorities, where Roma children are included. The programme targets children from four to twelve years old and this age group is covered in three manuals: from four to five years old, six to nine years old and ten to twelve years old (Cefai et al., 2014). All the activities proposed in the curriculum of the three manuals are organised in three levels, basic, intermediate and advanced. RESCUR curriculum covers six main themes: Developing Communication Skills; Establishing and Maintaining Healthy Relationships; Developing a Growth Mindset; Developing Self Determination; Building on Strengths; Turning Challenges into Opportunities. The first five themes have two subthemes and the last one six subthemes which focus on different developmental or situational challenges. In each manual, sessions are proposed to improve assets in children. Each session follows a sequenced structure including: a mindfulness activity; storytelling (stories created specifically for the curriculum with two mascots as main characters); analysis of the story and transfer to real life situations and to the children’s experiences; and, finally, practical, cooperative activities, such as games, roleplay and drawings (Cefai, Cavioni et al., 2015). The curriculum was developed to be implemented in schools by teachers. Nevertheless, as research shows that families are key elements in this process, they are also included in RESCUR program that develop a parent’s manual in order to allow for the continuity and reinforcement of the contents at home. This ecological approach is essential for the success of resilience promotion programmes. The curriculum was piloted in the six partner countries. Each country piloted a theme of the curriculum over six weeks. In total, 79 early and primary schools, 205 classrooms and 2,895 students from six European countries (Croatia, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Sweden) participated in the implementation of the curriculum (199 teachers and 1,935 children participated in the evaluation) (Cefai, Cavioni et al., 2015). The results of the teachers’ and the children’s evaluations were very positive. The curriculum, in particular its activities and resources, were highlighted by the teachers as interesting, useful and ready to use. Competence acquisition as well as changes in behaviour and in class climate were also mentioned by teachers and students as a positive outcome of the implementation.

134    Pedro Calado et al. In Portugal (Simões, Lebre, & Santos, 2016), RESCUR started a time extended implementation with a large group of teachers and children to evaluate its impact on the acquisition of resilience competences as well as on other emotional, cognitive, and behavioural developmental features. This implementation has its focus on the children of migrants and refugees and is supported by the National Agency for Scientific and Technological Culture – Programa Integra, which aims to promote inclusion of children and youth from migrant, refugee or forced relocation backgrounds through education and scientific culture. The Dream Teens Project.  Also, in Portugal there is now a huge trend towards social positive youth engagement. A key aspect of a Positive Youth Development framework is that all young people should be involved in maintaining or developing healthy behaviours, and to help finding solutions for problems if properly heard and if they become more active and participative in their lives and society. To meet this aim, the Dream Teens project was created with the mission (Frasquilho et al., 2018; Matos, 2015; Matos & Simões, 2016) to ensure a nationwide opportunity for youth to be included and empowered as agents of change, to have their voices heard, and at the same time to participate and engage as partners in decision making about issues that affect their lives and communities, valuing diversity and equity. The Dream Teens included: (1) youth participation – opportunities for youth participation in leadership of activities; (2) skill building – emphasis on the development of life skills; and (3) adult m ­ entorship – a context of sustained and caring adult–youth relationships. Young people from all over the country were recruited by social media and national TV and then used media to learn and to interact. They interacted via Facebook and were called to react and debate the topics of interest regularly posted by the senior staff team. Dissemination was also made available through media, social media, a web page4 and three web blogs.5 The Dream Teens project is thus, grounded in a positive and proactive view of promotional interventions where young people and media are used to promote social development. Young people have a specific place in community development, and the political and professional understanding of this fact will not only allow all young people to have a voice, but also will allow professionals to provide better health and educational services and to decrease social inequities.

Final Considerations The constitutional principle of non-discrimination (article 13 of the Portuguese Constitution) prevents the production of demographic and statistical data that allows us to have an exact picture of the size and spatial distribution of Roma people and families in Portugal. Nevertheless, respecting the constitutional principle and guaranteeing the anonymity of the individuals that compose

4

www.dreamteens.aventurasocial.com http://dreamteens2014-2015.blogspot.pt/; http://dreamteensaventurasocial.blogspot.pt; http://dreamteensaventurasocial.blogs.sapo.pt 5

The Roma Population in Portugal    135 this population group, through the National Study of Roma Communities and the Observatory of Roma Communities, it was possible to identify, in 2016, the existence of 37,089 Portuguese Roma women and men resident in Portugal, as well as mapping their territorial distribution. The results of the study show a high density of Roma population residing in the coast (in absolute terms) in the territories that register a greater population density, on the other hand, a high proportion of Roma population in the interior and in border areas (when compared to the total resident population). The Roma community’s portrait mapped out by the National Study allowed to highlight the diversity of this population group, from a spatial, economic, cultural, social, relational and symbolic perspective. This fact is essential to remember, to counteract the reproduction of homogenising and crystallised visions of Portuguese Roma people and families. This diversity of living conditions, which often remains slightly evident, is fundamental to understand, map and identify factors that foster higher and lower levels of social integration. We cannot conceal the fact that vulnerabilities remain at different levels, such as the lack of literacy, education and qualification, the existence of poor housing conditions, and inequalities in access (and success) to education, training and employment offers. Nevertheless, there is in course a process of social change and integration of the Roma communities that relies on two important fronts: (1) the efforts and investment of Roma communities; and (2) the commitment of public policies in mitigating the inequalities in the living conditions and opportunities. It is important to emphasise the bet and the valorisation of education and school as factors which unlock inequalities, as verified in the results of the survey conducted in the scope of the National Study: young people are the most educated group, which in turn has translated into better living conditions and better levels of social integration. It is important to emphasise the importance that Roma communities attribute to school attendance, even by girls, with cases of returning to school in adulthood. On the path of the valorisation and investment in education, a public policy measure arises in 2016: a programme to encourage and promote school success in higher education, the OPRE. There is certainly a lot of work to develop, in terms of housing, education, employment and discrimination, but the foundations of social integration are being laid.

References ACIDI. (2013). Estratégia Nacional para a Integração das Comunidades Ciganas. 2013–2020. [National strategy for the integration of Roma communities. 2013–2020.] Lisboa, Portugal: Alto Comissariado para a Imigração e Diálogo Intercultural. Baranyai, B., & Kiss, N. (2016). Opré Chavalé: Quebrar as barreiras que separam as comunidades ciganas do ensino superior. [Opré Chavalé: Breaking down the barriers that separate Roma communities from higher education.] Press Release. Retrieved from http://plataformamulheres.org.pt/wp-content/ficheiros/2016/02/bolsas-de-­estudospara-jovens-ciganas-os-comunicado-a-imprensa-13Fev2016.pdf Bastos, J. G. P. (org.) (2012). Portugueses Ciganos e Ciganofobia em Portugal. [Portuguese Gypsies and gypsy phobia in Portugal.] Lisboa, Prtugal: Colibri.

136    Pedro Calado et al. Candeias, P. (2016). «No estudar é que está o ganho?» Comparação entre ciganos com diferentes níveis de escolaridade com base em dados do Estudo Nacional sobre as Comunidades Ciganas. [“In studying is the gain?” Comparison between Roma with different levels of schooling based on data from the National Study on Roma communities.] Configurações [Online], 18. Retrieved from http://configuracoes.revues.org/ 3563 Castro, A. (2004). Ciganos e itinerância. Realidades concelhias e formas de hospitalidade. [Gypsies and itinerancy. Municipal realities and forms of hospitality. Cidades, Comunidades e Territórios, 9. (Dec), 55–69. Castro, A. (2006). Ciganos, Territórios e Itinerância. Análise de um questionário enviado aos postos da Guarda Nacional Republicana. [Gypsies, territories and Itinerancy. Analysis of a questionnaire sent to the posts of the Republican National Guard.] Lisboa: CET/ISCTE-IUL. Castro, A. (2007). Dos contextos locais à invisibilização política. Discussão em torno dos ciclos de exclusão habitacional dos ciganos em Portugal. [From local contexts to political invisibilization. Discussion around the cycles of housing exclusion of Roma in Portugal.] Cidades, Comunidades e Territórios, 15, 63–86. Castro, A. (2010). Ciganos e desigualdades sociais: Contributos para a inflexão de políticas públicas de cariz universalista. [Roma and social inequalities: Contributions to the inflection of public policies of universalist nature.] Fórum Sociológico, 20, 11–19. Castro, A. (2013). Na Luta pelos Bons Lugares: ciganos, visibilidade social e controvérsias espaciais. [In fight for good places: Gypsies, social visibility and spatial controversies.] Tese de Doutoramento em Antropologia, ISCTE-IUL, Portugal. Cefai, C., Cavioni, V., Bartolo, P., Simões, C., Miljevic-Ridicki, R., Bouilet, D., & Eriksson, C. (2015). Social inclusion and social justice: A resilience curriculum for early years and elementary schools in Europe. Journal for Multicultural Education, 9(3), 122–139. Cefai, C., Matsopoulos, A., Bartolo, P., Galea, K., Gavogiannaki, M., Zanetti, M. A., & Lebre, P. (2014). A resilience curriculum for early years and elementary schools in Europe: Enhancing quality education. Journal of Croatian Education, 16(2), 11–32. Cefai, C., Miljević-Riđički, R., Bouillet, D., Ivanec, T. P., Milanovoć, M., Matsopoulos, A., & Erikson, C. (2015). RESCUR: Surfing the waves. A resilience curriculum for early years and primary schools: A teacher’s guide. Malta, Europe: Centre for Resilience and Socio-Emotional Health, University of Malta. Decree-Law No. 90/2017 of 28 July. Retrieved from https://dre.pt/home//dre/107773651/ details/maximized European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2012). The situation of Roma in 11 EU member states. Survey results at a glance. Luxembourg, Europe: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/liliana.moreira.PCM/ Downloads/2099-FRA-2012-Roma-at-a-glance_EN.pdf Ferreira, T. L. (Ed.). (2014). Caracterização das Condições de Habitação das Comunidades Ciganas Residentes em Portugal. [Characterization of the housing conditions of the Roma communities residing in Portugal.] Instituto da Habitação e da Reabilitação Urbana, I.P. Retrieved from http://www.portaldahabitacao.pt/opencms/export/sites/ portal/pt/portal/publicacoes/documentos/caraterizacao_condicoes_habitacao.pdf Frasquilho, D., Ozer, E. J., Ozer, E. M., Branquinho, C., Camacho, I., Reis, M., … Gaspar de Matos, M. (2018). Dream Teens: Adolescents-Led Participatory Project in Portugal in the Context of the Economic Recession. Health Promotion Practice, 19(1), 51–59. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839916660679 Matos, M. G. (Ed.) (2015). Dream teens: Adolescents in safe navigation through unknown waters. Lisboa, Portugal: Coisas de Ler. Matos, M. G., & Simões, C. (2016). From positive youth development to youth’s engagement: The dream teens. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 8(1), 4–18.

The Roma Population in Portugal    137 Mendes, M., Magano, O., & Candeias, P. (2014). Estudo Nacional sobre as Comunidades Ciganas. [National Study on Roma communities.] Lisboa, Portugal: Alto Comissariado para as Migrações. Simões, C., Lebre, P., & Santos, A. C. (2016). Resiliência em ação: RESCUR, Currículo Europeu para a Resiliência. [Resilience in action: RESCUR, European Curriculum for Resilience.] OMNIA, 5, 35–43. SOS Racismo. (2001). Sastipen ta Li. Saúde e Liberdade. Ciganos: números, abordagens e realidades. [Sastipen ta Li. Health and freedom. Roma: Numbers, approaches and realities.] Lisboa, Portugal: Ed. SOS Racismo. Sousa, C. J., & Moreira, L. (2017) (Coord.). Aprofundamento do Estudo Nacional sobre as Comunidades Ciganas. [Further development of the national study on Roma communities.] Retrieved from https://issuu.com/acmemrevista/docs/acm_emrevista_5_digital Vicente, M. J. (2009). As Comunidades Ciganas e a Saúde: Um primeiro retrato nacional. [Roma communities and health: A first national portrait.] Porto, Portugal: REAPN – Rede Europeia Anti-Pobreza/Portugal Triveneto.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 7

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain Through Successful Educational Actions Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon Abstract In this chapter, the authors describe the developments towards Roma inclusion in Spain through Successful Educational Actions. First, the authors describe the main characteristics of the Spanish Roma Minority with special regard to their cultural and linguistic diversity and deprivated social situation. After a brief overview of the Spanish education system, the authors give a detailed picture of the educational attainment of the Roma minority in Spain. After then the authors present and analyse the most important successful policies and support programmes for Roma education. Keywords: Spain; Roma minority; Successful Educational Actions; cultural and linguistic diversity; deprivated social situation; educational attainment

The Roma Minority in Spain Number, Groups, Names and Legal Status of the Roma People in Spain Roma have been living in Spain for centuries. According to historical documents, Roma’s presence on the Iberian Peninsula dates back to the early fifteenth century (García, 2006; Sánchez Ortega, 1994a, 1994b, 2009). At present, despite a lack of official statistics, Spain possesses one of Europe’s largest Roma populations. The absence of official data is a result of the weight personal data protection legislation (Personal Data Protection Act 15, 1999), which protects details containing information on people’s ethnic origins. Estimates on the size

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 139–162 Copyright © 2020 by Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191012

140    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. of the Roma community in Spain vary according to the source cited. According to the Council of Europe (2012b), Spain’s Roma community comprises 725,000 people, while the 2014 FOESSA Report (Damonti & Arza, 2014) estimates the Roma population to be between 800,000 and 1,000,000. The Spanish region with the highest number of Roma is Andalusia followed by Catalonia, Madrid and the Valencian Community (García, 2006). Most Roma people in Spain belong to the ‘Kale’ subgroup (‘Kalo’ in Romani means black). This subgroup accounts for 10% of the total Roma population and resides mainly in Spain, Portugal and southern France. There is also a Kale subgroup in Finland, and another in Wales that arrived from Spain via France and Cornwall (Council of Europe, 2012a). In Spain, the term most frequently used to refer to this group is gitano (Gypsy). The surname ‘Egipto’ was usually given to Roma in the Kingdom of Castile in the late fifteenth century. In fact, the first official texts speak of people from ‘Little Egypt’. The term gitano about Roma in Spain is therefore a linguistic deformation of the term ‘Egiptano’ (Egyptian), since it was believed that Roma came from Little Egypt. This ‘Egyptian’ origin myth is probably attributable to the fact that Romani counts and dukes spoke of a ‘Little Egypt’, which was really a Venetian port on the western coast of the Peloponnese peninsula called Methoni (Jiménez-González, 2017). Spanish Roma have the same rights as other Spanish citizens. However, legal and structural discrimination against Spanish Roma has been observed since their arrival to the Iberian Peninsula (fifteenth century) through to today (JiménezGonzález, 2017; Sánchez Ortega, 2009; Santos-Pitanga, Macías-Aranda, Amador-López, & Cortés-Cortés, 2016). The situation for Roma migrants who live in Spain is even worse than that of Spanish Roma because they are often undocumented or not Spanish citizens, which means that they do not have access to education, health care, housing or employment (EU-FRA, 2012; Sordé, 2012–2014).

Culture and Language In view of the transnational nature of this ethnic minority, values and identity traits that are common to Roma people in general have been described (Fraser, 1992; García-Espinel, 2016; Hancock, 2004; Rodríguez Lopez-Ros, 2011). Though the list is not comprehensive and is not intended to generalise, the values and identity traits of Roma in Spain include the following: ⦁⦁ The family is the pillar on which most Romani values rest. ⦁⦁ There is an awareness of a common origin that fosters a link between Roma. ⦁⦁ Respect for others – and particularly for the elderly – is a key to the wisdom and

experience of elderly Roma, also called ‘respected Roma’, ‘aunts’ and ‘uncles’.

⦁⦁ Solidarity, closeness, collaboration and reciprocal support are entrenched val-

ues that have been strengthened by the discrimination and exclusion that Roma have endured. ⦁⦁ Freedom is a key element of the Roma identity. ⦁⦁ There is pride in being Roma.

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    141 ⦁⦁ There is great value in one’s word. Because of persistent social and educational

exclusion in Spain, a verbal promise has the same value that a written and signed agreement would have in other social groups or societies.

Also noteworthy is the influence of the Pentecostal movement, which has successfully spread among Spain’s Roma community. Pentecostalism began to gain support among Roma in the mid-twentieth century and became well-established in Spain through the Evangelical Church of Philadelphia. This Pentecostal denomination has attracted the largest proportion of Roma at the national level. The Evangelical Church of Philadelphia has greatly influenced the Roma community. The influence of Pentecostal values can be seen in improved levels of health, increased formalisation of work status, social rejection of illegal actions, increases in literacy rates and improvements in longstanding social problems such as gender-based violence (Amador, Flecha, & Sordé, 2018; Atasanov, 2008; Cantón, Marcos, Medina, & Mena, 2004). It should also be noted that Roma have their own language: Romani (Hancock, 2006; Jiménez-González, 2009; Matras, 2002). This language is used by most Roma people throughout the world, but as a result of centuries of repression, the Spanish Roma community has in large part lost the use of this language. Nevertheless, Spain’s Roma population speak Caló, a dialect which borrows from Roma vocabulary while using the syntactic structures of Spanish. The dialect’s name is derived from the ‘Kale’ ethnic subgroup, the Roma ethnic subgroup that resides in Spain (Jiménez-González, 2009, 2017).

Social Situation The situation of Roma in Spain clearly remains unequal with respect to the majority population. Roma are currently the most rejected and excluded social group in Spain and throughout Europe (CIS, 2013; ENAR, 2013). Research has previously observed that poverty affects those traditionally excluded more severely, and for a longer period of time, as in the case of Roma (European Commission, 2010b; Valls, 2012–2014). The severe poverty rate of the Spanish Roma population is 37.8%, while the rest of the Spanish population has a severe poverty rate of only 6.5%. If we also consider the moderate poverty rate, more than 70% of the Roma population in Spain lives below the poverty threshold, while 37.1% of the rest of the population in Spain suffers this situation (Damonti & Arza, 2014). Roma social exclusion in Spain is also observed in their health, employment, housing and education conditions; these four areas are crucial in terms of the inclusion of any social group (European Commission, 2011a; UNDP, 2016). In the following section, we present the Roma social situation in these four areas.

Health When analysing the health status of the Roma people, one must consider the importance of social determinants, such as education level, labour market access and housing conditions, given that the inequality and exclusion experienced by Roma in each of these areas also influence their health status (Damonti & Arza,

142    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. 2014; La Parra, Gil-González & Jiménez, 2013; Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity, 2016). According to research findings, Spain’s Roma population have less healthy lifestyles, leading to nutritional problems, higher accident rates and barriers to health resources and preventive measures. Compared to the rest of the population, this ethnic minority also suffers from higher rates of chronic diseases and infant mortality and has lower life expectancies (La Parra et al., 2013; Martín-Pérez et al., 2015). Given that research on this topic is scarce, it is imperative to stress the need for more data on the health status of the Roma population. Despite the fact that Roma have been in Spain for centuries, very few studies have been conducted on their health status (Carrasco-Garrido, de Andrés, Barrera, Jiménez-Trujillo, & Jiménez-García, 2011). This poses an obstacle to designing and developing strategies aimed at addressing the Roma health gap. Ethnicity was not included in the Spanish National Health Survey until 2006. That year, for the first time, data on the health status of the Roma were collected. Following the application of the National Health Survey on the Roma Population (Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity, 2006), a comparative study of the health status of Roma and non-Roma women in Spain was conducted (Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2011). The study, carried out in 2011, concluded that Roma women had an inferior health status, a less healthy lifestyle and poorer access to healthcare resources than did non-Roma women. Similarly, research has found that Roma women in Spain have higher rates of obesity, depression and migraines. With regard to unhealthy habits, this same group has higher rates of alcohol consumption and lower rates of physical activity than their non-Roma counterparts. At the same time, there is evidence that Roma women smoke less, which is thought to be due to ethnic considerations, since the rejection of smoking is highly prevalent within this group. Roma women are also more likely to self-medicate, a tendency which often involves an inaccurate perception of one’s health status or the presence of a chronic illness. They also visit doctors less frequently, undergo fewer tests and are less likely to take preventive measures that could prevent or detect illnesses in a timely manner (Carrasco-Garrido et al., 2011; Damonti & Arza, 2014; La Parra et al., 2013). Hence, health inequality is higher among Roma women, and in Catalonia (Spain), their life expectancy is lower than that of Roma men. These statistics are reversed within the majority society, where women have a higher life expectancy than men. Life expectancy discrepancies are even higher when comparing Roma women with non-Roma Catalan women, the latter of whom enjoy a much longer life expectancy (Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government, 2005).

Employment The gap in employment opportunities places the Roma community in a position of even greater vulnerability. Roma often find themselves caught in a cycle of poverty, which is associated with low levels of education and which negatively influences their access to the labour market. In the labour market, a context where the most valued competencies are those acquired through formal education, the

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    143 extracurricular skills that Roma have are often not considered. Apart from education levels, ethnic discrimination is another clear contributor to employment inequality among Roma. Research has identified a longstanding trend of ethnic discrimination practices that have a high level of social acceptance (EU-FRA, 2012, 2014a; Fernández, Domínguez, & Flecha, 2004; Flecha, 2001–2004; ­Flecha, Vargas, & Davila, 2004) At the national level, 36.4% of the active Roma population was unemployed in 2011, while only 20.9% of the majority society was in the same situation (Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2012). The employment gap in Spain between Roma and the majority population has also been identified in other recent studies (Damonti & Arza, 2014; EU-FRA, 2014c). In addition, Roma are more vulnerable to periods of unstable employment, and the repercussions of the recession have disproportionately affected this group, increasing their poverty rates (Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity, 2011). In the case of Roma women, they are once again bearing the brunt of this situation, as they must live with the combined consequences of both ethnic and gender discrimination (O’Higgins, 2015; Preoteasa, 2013). Similarly, the study Discrimination against and living conditions of Roma women in 11 EU Member States,1 carried out by the European Union for the Fundamental Rights Agency, warns that 40% of Roma women in Spain have no other work than that of homemakers. In addition, while 29% of Roma men perform paid work, only 14% of Roma women are in the same situation (EU-FRA, 2014a). Research also indicates that in Spain, 85% of Roma women who are employed work under a contract that does not meet accepted standards for working conditions (Preoteasa, 2013).

Housing The status of housing within the Roma population is influenced by three issues: residential segregation, barriers to the subsidised and free housing market and substandard living conditions. With regard to residential segregation, although it is true that shantytowns persist within the Romani community, only 3.9% of this population live in them. The problem is that a very large number of Roma families live in substandard urban and rural conditions and are affected by significant interconnected problems such as a lack of services, unsanitary conditions and poor public security, among others (Damonti & Arza, 2014; Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2007; Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity, 2011). Added to this segregation are difficulties in finding housing. Though this is a common problem among the general population, it is particularly acute within the Roma population because of two issues. On the one hand, the requirements for obtaining social housing or other types of assistance represent a special obstacle for Roma as they often do not have formal employment, personal savings or the credit history needed to take out a mortgage. On the other hand, access to the free housing

1

The countries covered in the study include the following: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia.

144    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. market (and in particular rental housing) is particularly hampered by the discrimination that the Roma community is subjected to (Damonti & Arza, 2014). Considering this situation, research has noted the ineffectiveness of certain public initiatives and policies that only exacerbate the segregation of Roma. Such research also denounces discriminatory practices carried out by certain individuals including not selling or renting housing to Roma, or mobilising to prevent them from moving into a neighbourhood. Institutional discrimination is also prevalent, which may be perpetrated by governments, estate agents, financial institutions, etc. (Gago-Cortés & Novo-Corti, 2015). Finally, one of the most worrisome housing problems for the Roma community is that of substandard living conditions. As noted by the Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality (2011), more than 60% of Roma households experience at least one of the following four difficulties: (1) overcrowding; (2) very deteriorated living spaces (walls, floors, windows, doors, etc.); (3) lack of basic services or facilities (running water, hot water, toilets, showers or electrical installations); and/or (4) lack of public urban services.

Roma in the Education System The Spanish Education System In Spain, both the Spanish Constitution and all of the international standards ratified by Spain prohibit racial discrimination. The central law that regulates education at the national level is the Organic Law of Education. Education, however, is a competence transferred to different autonomous communities, and each community regulates and organises their own education system at the regional level, within the framework of the state law. In the Spanish educational system, five major types of education are distinguished: 1. Early childhood education (between 0 and 6 years of age), which is non-compulsory. 2. Primary education (between 6 and 12 years of age), which is compulsory and free of charge in public institutions (except for the purchase of books and educational materials). 3. Compulsory education or high school level (between 12 and 16 years of age) (known as ‘the ESO’). 4. Post-compulsory secondary education, which includes different vocational training programs and, where it is necessary, the compulsory education degree to be accepted. 5. Higher education, which includes university level and other higher educational programs (such as arts, sports, etc.) and where there are different ways to gain acceptance. The current Spanish Educational Law addresses the need to achieve equity for all social groups though the implementation of several measures intended

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    145 to compensate for any educational inequality. Within these measures, educational systems utilise the development of subgroups (separate from the main group), ability grouping and adaptation of curriculum (commonly watering down the contents of this curriculum). In spite of these measures, research is already revealing that these measures are contributing to the social and educational exclusion of the most vulnerable groups, such as the Roma people (Flecha, 2015; Macías-Aranda & Flecha, 2013; Valls, 2008–2010). In terms of ability grouping, research identified the dramatic effects of this form of differentiation in education (Hanushek & Wößmann, 2006; Lucas & Berends, 2002; Oakes, 1995; Wiatrowski, Hansell, Massey, & Wilson, 1982). Additionally, vulnerable groups, especially Roma people, are frequently included in low ability-level groups, which means fewer educational and social opportunities (Girbés-Peco, Macías-Aranda, & Álvarez-Cifuentes, 2015; Santiago & Maya, 2012). The same pattern can be observed in the context of curriculum adaptation, which primarily involves the reduction of content and learning levels. This measure is commonly implemented with Roma students (CREA, 2010; Macías-Aranda & Flecha, 2013; Sordé-Martí, 2006; Valls, 2012–2014; Vargas & Gómez, 2003), and research has already identified the resultant social exclusion (Ladson-Billings, 2016; Pustjens, Van de Gaer, Van Damme, & Onghena, 2008; Rosenbaum, 1976; Terwel, 2005; Wiatrowski et al., 1982). All of these factors are contributing to high dropout rates and school failure among Roma students (Macías-Aranda & Flecha, 2013; Sordé-Martí, 2006). The grouping of Roma students in such underperforming classrooms is usually justified on the basis of the learning difficulties that these students have or simply on the basis of the educational and learning problems believed to be intrinsic to Roma culture. Another important issue related to the Spanish Educational Law and its impact on the Roma people is the students’ school assignment. According to the Law, students are supposed to attend school(s) in their neighbourhood (with some exceptions). As we observed in the previous sections, one of the main problems for the Roma in Spain is urban (residential) segregation. Because of this, and as a result of the Spanish Educational Law, the percentage of Roma students in some schools is very high (even 100% in some cases). In practice, this means that the majority of Roma students are segregated into underperforming public schools, known as ‘ghetto schools’ (Santiago & Maya, 2012). This segregation, or disproportionately high concentration of Roma students in ‘special’ schools and classrooms, usually occurs in the presence of a partial or total reduction in learning content. This has a highly negative effect on the quality of the education received by Roma students and limits their social opportunities, particularly in regards to employment (CREA, 2010; Vargas & Gómez, 2003). Research has noted that school ethnic composition is not the cause of educational failure; the problem lies with the educational practices being implemented in these schools (Flecha, 2015; Flecha & Soler, 2013; INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009). Very often these schools tend to water down the curriculum, reducing the number of hours per week, and implement other exclusionary actions that directly contribute to the social exclusion and educational failure of Roma

146    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. students (CREA, 2010; Flecha, 2001–2004; Macías-Aranda & Flecha, 2013; Sordé-Martí, 2006; Valls, 2012–2014; Vargas & Gómez, 2003). Finally, one other important issue with the Spanish Educational Law (from Educational Law implemented in 1990 through the present) is that at 12 years of age, students change from primary to compulsory education. As a general rule, primary and high schools are located in different educational centres, one far from the other, sometimes even out of the student’s neighbourhood. In fact, most predominantly Roma neighbourhoods do not have high schools, which mean that Roma students must commute to attend compulsory education. Research has noted that this situation, in addition to problems such as violence and discrimination found in many high schools, helps to explain the high levels of dropout and school failure of Roma students within this range of compulsory education (CREA, 2010; Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government, 2005; Sordé-Martí, 2006).One of the requests of Roma families in Spain is to allow students to complete their compulsory education in the same educational centre where their primary education is carried out (CREA, 2010; Girbés-Peco et al., 2015; Sordé-Martí, 2006).

Educational Attainment of the Roma The main difficulties associated with education are high dropout rates, school failures and illiteracy of Roma students and families in Spain (EU-FRA, 2014b; Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2013; Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity, 2011; Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government, 2005). Roma students face substantial socio-economic barriers that restrict their access to education. Research has shown that many people remain marginalised from the educational system, and a high percentage of Roma children do not attend class on a regular basis (Macías-Aranda & Redondo, 2012). We should note that current data indicate some progress in the schooling of Roma children at the primary and secondary levels. Although primary education enrolment rates are lower among Roma compared with the population as a whole, some studies have found evidence of significant enrolment increases in recent years. As a case in point, between 1994 and 2010, no fewer than 87% of Romani children attended preschool prior to entering compulsory education (Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2010). In regard to primary education, data indicate that the enrolment of Roma children is practically standardised, although absenteeism and dropout rates are still markedly high. In 2011, the European Union for Fundamental Rights Agency (2014b) conducted a study on the educational status of Roma people in 11 European states, including Spain. Its results point to an educational gap that places Roma at a distinct disadvantage in comparison with the majority population. According to the study of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2014b), the absenteeism rate among Roma students in Spain stands at 36% and is often the precursor to students dropping out of school at an early age. These problems are compounded in compulsory secondary education (Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity, 2011), as 64% of Roma students (aged 16–24) do not complete compulsory studies, compared to 13% of all students in Spain (Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2013). Roma women report higher school dropout

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    147 rates, and few go on to graduate after the age of 16. In Spain many Roma girls dropout of primary school, and only a small percentage complete secondary education (only 3%, compared to 63% of non-Roma young women) (Melgar, Larena, Ruiz, & Rammel, 2011). Moreover, and in spite of reductions in illiteracy and failure to attend school, illiteracy rates among the Roma population are still 3–9 times higher than in the society as a whole. According to the FRA-Spain survey (2014b), illiteracy affected 14% of Roma participants aged 16 and older. Nonetheless, the study did cite progress in the field of literacy among younger generations. Thus, while illiteracy in Spain affects 35% of Roma people over the age of 45, only 1% of Roma between 16 and 24 identified themselves as being illiterate. However, the most significant educational gap between Roma and the nonRoma population was in post-compulsory studies. While 8.1% of the Roma population have studied and completed vocational training or earned a Bachelor’s degree, 26.9% of the rest of the population have achieved the same (i.e. figures for the Roma community are three times lower). There is a larger gap if we observe the university level. While only 1% of Roma have a university degree, 30% of the rest of the population reach this educational stage (Damonti & Arza, 2014). In other words, according to a study conducted by Fundación Secretariado Gitano (2013), for every three Roma people who have earned a university degree, 276 non-Roma individuals have earned one. Other aspects that may explain the educational gap experienced by Roma (CREA, 2010; Flecha, 2006–2011; Girbés-Peco et al., 2015; Valls, 2008–2010) are related to the following: ⦁⦁ Omission of Roma culture from educational curricula and textbooks, the latter

of which often transmit a negative image of Roma people.

⦁⦁ Discrimination in the application of disciplinary sanctions against Roma

students.

⦁⦁ Communication or behaviour on the part of teachers that reflect negative prej-

udices towards the Roma community itself.

Finally, another factor that contributes to the educational failure of Roma is a lack of role models, both in schools and within the wider community. This makes it more difficult for Roma to raise and transform their educational expectations, since they often believe that they will not be able to achieve success because they do not know anyone in their community who has done the same. In this regard, many studies have documented the influence of role models on members of excluded or vulnerable communities (De Clerck, 2009; Evans, 1992; Maylor, 2009; Minority Access Inc., 2014; Pozdnyakova & Moiseeva, 2008; Rezai-Rashti & Martino, 2010; Yancey, 1998). More evidence on this issue can be found in the context of the US black or African American community. Maylor’s work (2009) shows how black primary and secondary teachers in the United States have become excellent positive role models for their black male students and thus have helped to transform not only their learning expectations but also their social outlook. Other research (Evans, 1992; Klopfenstein, 2005) demonstrates the influence that these role models have on improved learning outcomes. Also

148    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. noteworthy in this regard is the work of Minority Access Incorporated, an organisation that has worked with more than 170 US colleges and universities to implement and manage programmes and services to recruit students from populations traditionally excluded from the university system (Minority Access Inc., 2014). One of the most noteworthy initiatives undertaken by this organisation is Minority Access’ Role Models project.

Successful Policies and Support Programmes for Roma Education First, it is important to highlight several important political achievements in Spain that benefit the Roma community. Due to the WORKALÓ project findings, an EU project funded by the 5th Framework program, the Spanish Congress of the Deputies adopted the first law in Spain directly focussed on the recognition of the Roma situation and on the implementation of special measures to improve conditions for this community (Aiello, Mondejar, & Pulido, 2013). Since then, Spain has adopted different political initiatives focussed on Spanish Roma inclusion. Today, the Spanish Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2020, following the guidelines developed by the European Commission (2011b), is in place. Goals include increasing school attendance and the success of Roma people at all educational levels (Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity, 2012). In addition to the Spanish Strategy, several regions in Spain have specific political frameworks focussed on the inclusion of Roma people. In Catalonia, Roma people have been recognised as ethnic group since 2001, with the same rights as Catalonians, and as a people who have contributed to the cultural and social development of the region. In 2005, Catalonia implemented a specific integrated plan for the Roma in this region. This plan marked the first time that an Autonomous Community developed specific political measures for the Roma people with its own budget to implement these actions (Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government, 2005). In 2009, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights selected this plan as a positive initiative in improving the situation of Roma EU citizens (EU-FRA, 2009). Currently, the Roma Advisory Council of Catalonia has approved the 4th Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia (2017–2020). Considering the previous edition of the plan (2014–2016), this group of public policies is divided into 13 areas including education, employment, housing, health, women, youth and the Roma population of Europe. One of the main characteristics of this plan is a focus on effective actions aimed at achieving measurable successes. In this sense, there is a clear intention to develop programs that have already demonstrated a social impact on the educational success of the Roma community. For this reason, the majority of the plan’s measures are based on research that has demonstrated successful outcomes in improving the lives of the Roma. In this scenario, the Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia is implementing Successful Educational Actions (SEAs) in several Catalan areas with a high percentage of Roma. As we will explain in the next section, SEAs have been identified by the INCLUD-ED project, an EU project funded by the 6th Framework Program (Flecha, 2015). One of the most significant impacts achieved by the

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    149 Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia has been college access for more than 15 Roma young adults. This achievement has been made possible due to a family program for Roma people to prepare them to pass the official university entrance exam for people over 25 (Macías-Aranda, 2017).

The Social and Educational Inclusion of Roma People Through SEAs The SEAs Approach At present, it is difficult for schools to respond to the needs of students and their families, as well as respond to the challenges of today’s society. One of the main reasons for this inadequacy is the application of educational actions that are not based on scientific evidence, negatively affecting the most disadvantaged groups, such as immigrant populations or cultural minorities like the Roma people (CREA, 2010; European Parliament, 2009; Flecha, 2015; Macías-Aranda & Flecha, 2013). Educational actions cannot be based on the beliefs of experts if those beliefs are not validated by the scientific community. Educational professionals must know that their actions will have positive outcomes in order to implement them, and they must dismiss those actions that science has demonstrated will not generate positive academic results and/or will reproduce social and educational exclusion of the most vulnerable groups. Within the 6th Framework Program of the European Commission, the project ‘INCLUD-ED – Strategies for Inclusion and Social Cohesion in Europe from Education’ (2006–2011)2 was developed. INCLUD-ED analysed the educational actions carried out in all European educational systems, as well as related theories and scientific contributions. Through 22 specific case studies and six longitudinal case studies, the project identified educational actions that contribute to overcoming social inequalities, and those actions that reproduce school failure and social exclusion. Thus, INCLUD-ED identified a set of SEAs defined as the actions which achieve the best results in instrumental learning and coexistence in any context to which they are applied (Flecha, 2015). The project defined the conditions that an educational action must fulfil in order to be considered a SEAs. These conditions are the following: ⦁⦁ The educational actions are achieving maximum improvements in educational

outcomes.

⦁⦁ The success of the educational actions must be transferable to other diverse

contexts.

⦁⦁ The two previous conditions must be demonstrated in scientific investigations

which include the voices of the different actors (researchers and participants).

⦁⦁ The three previous conditions must be validated in scientific publications

within the field of education.

2

For further information, please visit http://creaub.info/included/about/.

150    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. The application of these criteria allows us to differentiate SEAs from good or best practice approaches. In the case of the latter, implementation can generate educational improvements, but success is not guaranteed in other diverse contexts. Additionally, good practices are not examined and/or validated for the international scientific community. According to the definition of INCLUD-ED (2009), the SEAs are the following: Interactive Groups.  Interactive groups are a way of organising the classroom (Díez-Palomar & Cabré, 2015; Valls & Kyriakides, 2013). The classroom is arranged in heterogeneous groups of four or five students with the support of an adult (usually a volunteer). The heterogeneity of the student groups refers to gender, culture, learning level, special needs, etc., and the supporting adults can be professionals from the educational centre or other community members (family members, volunteers, former teachers, university students, etc.). Research reveals that through interactive groups, interactions multiply and diversify, while increasing student work time (tasks). Interactive groups work involves the following steps: the teacher proposes different activities and each small group works together, supported by a family member or volunteer who facilitates interactions within the group. This educational action accelerates learning for all students in all subjects, values, emotions and feelings, and its impact has been especially highlighted with the most vulnerable students, as migrants and Roma (Díez-Palomar & Cabré, 2015; Valls & Kyriakides, 2013). Dialogic Reading.  Dialogic reading is based on the collective construction of meanings and knowledge from the dialogue established between all of the people (students, teachers, families, etc.) who participate in a dialogic gathering. The function of dialogic gatherings is based on the seven principles of Dialogic Learning (Flecha, 2000) and they are developed based on great works in the humanities, from literature to art or music. There are several types of dialogic gatherings, each one focussed on classic literature, music, visual arts, mathematics, science and education, among others. The dialogic literary gatherings consist of collective interpretation and debate on classical works of literature. Students individually read a set number of pages at home and choose a specific paragraph to comment on in class. The teacher who moderates the session turns the floor over to the students, who comment on their highlighted paragraph or idea. The results obtained with this SEA are related to improvements in reading levels, oral expression, reading comprehension, and coexistence, and in the case of vulnerable populations, as Roma people, its impact is especially significant (Flecha & Soler, 2013; Llopis, Villarejo, Soler, & Alvarez, 2016; Pulido & Zepa, 2010). It is important to emphasise the importance of conducting literary gatherings with classical works in order to meet the requirements of successful academic performance. The same criteria should be applied in musical or artistic gatherings. Extending Learning Time.  Extending learning time originates with the idea of exposing students to more learning time, in more spaces, and with more people. This action has the aim of multiplying and diversifying the learning contexts of students, which results in more options and spaces for learning. An example of this action is the implementation of tutored libraries. In tutored libraries, different members of the educational community are present in the library space

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    151 during non-teaching hours to create more spaces for activities such as studying, homework and language learning. This workspace and interaction becomes especially beneficial in disadvantaged contexts, where the availability of spaces and materials for work, study and consultation is lower than that to which advantaged households have access (Girbés-Peco et al., 2015; Valls, 2008–2010). Family Education.  This action is based on the premise of the importance of lifelong learning for the entire educational community. In the same way that teachers receive continuous training, research indicates that it is important that family members also receive continuing education, especially in social contexts where adults have not had access to quality academic training (INCLUD-ED Consortium, 2009). Therefore, the centre incorporates courses for family and community members into its training plan. Family education must respond to the needs of families from a perspective of high expectations and based primarily on improving the instrumental skills of families through high quality educational programs. Research shows that when family members are engaged in learning processes themselves, a spill over effect occurs in sibling relationships, promoting educational interactions at home (Flecha, 2015). The high social and educational impact of this successful action has been demonstrated, especially within the Roma community (Flecha & Soler, 2013; Macías-Aranda, 2017; Sordé-Martí & Macías-Aranda, 2017). Educational Community Participation.  We have seen different techniques for facilitating educational community participation (i.e. interactive groups, family education, extended learning time). Another level of participation considered as a SEA is the authentic involvement of families and other community members in decision-making processes. This kind of participation affects key aspects of educational centres and the education of the students (i.e. the development and evaluation of curriculum, school management). This form of democratic participation is beneficial for intercultural cooperation in the centres, since it promotes an equal recognition of the voices of all people, regardless of their cultural or ethnic origin (Flecha, 2015). The benefits and success of this level of participation are particularly significant in the case of the Roma community, because Roma have been traditionally excluded from these social and educational spaces of participation (Flecha & Soler, 2013; Macías-Aranda, 2017; Sordé-Martí & MacíasAranda, 2017). Dialogical Model of Conflict Resolution.  This action is specifically aimed at improving coexistence within schools. In this model of conflict resolution, agreement between all parties form a central axis, in which students, relatives and professors reach an agreement regarding the norms of coexistence, as well as the protocols to maintain their fulfilment. This model is based on the use of dialogue as a tool to resolve conflicts, overcome stereotypes and promote spaces of consensus among all people (Flecha, 2015). The social impact of the SEAs, especially in relation to educational success and social inclusion of the most disadvantaged groups, such as Roma community, has already been highlighted in numerous studies (Alvarez, García-Carrión, Puigvert, Pulido, & Schubert, 2018; Díez-Palomar & Cabré, 2015; Flecha & Soler, 2013; Girbés-Peco et al., 2015; Llopis et al., 2016; Sordé-Martí & Macías-Aranda, 2017; Valls & Kyriakides, 2013). Evidences

152    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. of the SEAs’ impact as indicated in the research demonstrate: (1) a reduction in absenteeism and increases in school enrolment; (2) improvements in coexistence and the relationships between families and the centres; (3) the reduction of school failure and dropout rates, and improvements in student academic performance; and (4) and improvements in the educational skills and academic backgrounds of families, increasing their educational and social expectations, and transforming their social and educational inequalities. In this sense, the European Commission selected the INCLUD-ED project as one of the 10 most successful examples of the Framework Program of Research (European Commission, 2011a). It was selected due to the aforementioned social impacts it has inspired (which were also included in several European resolutions and recommendations)3 and was the only project to be selected from the social sciences and humanities. These Successful Educational A-tions are being implemented in educational centres around the world. In fact, the INCLUD-ED project identified these actions in many public schools in Europe. However, one kind of school should be highlighted because of its social impact and educational improvements, thanks to implementation of those SEAs: ‘Schools as Learning Communities’.

‘Schools as Learning Communities’: The Case of the ‘Mediterrani’ School (Tarragona, Catalonia) ‘Schools as Learning Communities’ is a project focussed on the process of schools overcoming school failure and coexistence problems through the implementation of SEAs (Díez-Palomar & Flecha, 2010; Ríos, Herrero, & Rodríguez, 2013). These schools align with recommendations of the scientific community which highlight two key factors for learning in the current society: interactions and community involvement. ‘Schools as Learning Communities’ represent a commitment to achieving educational equality within the framework of the information society; they are an opportunity to overcome the social and educational exclusion of the most vulnerable groups such as Roma people (Díez-Palomar & Flecha, 2010; Flecha & Soler, 2013; Girbés-Peco et al., 2015). There are more almost 500 educational centres which are ‘Schools as Learning Communities’: 209 in Spain, 120 in Brazil, 44 in Colombia, 41 in Peru, 39 in Argentina, 24 in Mexico and 11 in Chile. In addition, it is important to note that there are numerous schools in Spain, as

3

Some examples of the political impact of INCLUD-ED are the following recommendations and resolutions, which highlight the Successful Educational Actions and the project ‘Schools as Learning Communities’: Council conclusions of 11 May 2010 on the social dimension of education and training (2010/C 135/02); Communication from the EC (January 2011); Tackling early school leaving: A key contribution to the Europe 2020 Agenda; Council Recommendation on policies to reduce early school leaving (June 2011) (10544/11); European Parliament resolution of 2 April 2009 on educating the children of migrants (2008/2328(INI)); European Parliament resolution of 9 March 2011 on the EU strategy on Roma inclusion (2010/2276(INI)).

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    153 well as in America and other European countries (such as the UK, Italy, Portugal or Malta), implementing Successful Educational Actions without being ‘Schools as Learning Communities’. For example, there are 693 schools in America that are implementing SEAs without being ‘Schools as Learning Communities’. Additional schools in this category are located in Mexico (94), Colombia (1), Peru (21), Brazil (474), Argentina (100) and Chile (3) (Instituto Natura, 2017). In the case of Spain, many of these ‘Schools as Learning Communities’ are located in predominantly Roma neighbourhoods, attending to a huge number of students and families that are Roma (in some cases 100% Roma). Many schools were dealing with complicated educational and social conditions prior to the implementation of the SEAs. Currently, Roma students and their families are achieving high educational performances, and their educational and social expectations are increasing considerably. There are a large number of ‘Schools as Learning Communities’ that demonstrate the significant social impact of the SEAs on Roma inclusion. In this chapter, we have highlighted the case of the ‘Mediterrani’ School in Tarragona (Catalonia, Spain). This school is a public centre that enrols students from three to 12 years old (preschool and primary school). The school is located in one of the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods of Catalonia, where the population is mainly Roma and migrants. More than 140 students were enrolled in the school during the academic year 2016–2017. The neighbourhood (‘Campclar’ in Catalan) is known for its marginality and social exclusion, its residential segregation and deprivation of resources, and especially for its extremely high rates of unemployment and illiteracy. With regard to the student composition of the school, more than 65% are Roma, more than 25% are Moroccan, and the rest (approximately 6%) are from other nationalities, including many immigrants from Romania or India (EduRom Project, 2015; García, Álvarez, & Macías-Aranda, 2016). In 2012, the ‘Mediterrani’ School began a transformation process to become a School as Learning Community and to implement SEAs. This transformative process originated because of serious problems at the school in terms of absenteeism, school failure, and a lack of peaceful coexistence. The school, which began implementing SEAs at the end of the academic year 2011–2012 is showing extraordinary success in regards to literacy at the preschool level. In the academic year 2011–2012, the percentage of five-year-old students who wrote and/or read was 21.05%. After only one year of implementing SEAs, the percentage increased to 80% (almost 60 points of difference). In the academic year 2014–2015, 92.3% of three-year-old read and/or wrote syllabic sounds, when in the academic year 2011–2012, the percentage of five year olds who recognised this type of sound was below 32%, which represents a difference of almost 60 points (Macías-Aranda, 2017). Regarding primary education, according to internal evaluations, the percentage of students who successfully met the objectives of 4th grade (10-year-old students) increased from 30% to 60% between 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 (Cabré, Gómez, Macías-Aranda, Martín, & Sampé, 2014). Between the academic years 2011–2012 and 2014–2015, the number of students who successfully passed the cycles in relation to instrumental areas increased by 25% (Macías-Aranda, 2017).

154    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. All of these instrumental improvements achieved through the implementation of SEAs have increased student enrolment rates and have reduced absenteeism. After only one year of implementing them, the enrolment of children at the preschool level (not mandatory in Spain) increased by 66.6% (García et al., 2016). This is especially relevant because, according to the scientific literature, as well as international bodies and institutions, cultural minorities such as the Roma people tend to have high levels of absenteeism during early school levels when enrolling their children in primary education (Brüggemann, 2012; European Commission, 2011b; Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government, 2005). This is mainly due to the distrust of these groups in the educational system, especially with regard to the care and attention that can be given to Roma children in the preschool stage (Arnold & Doctoroff, 2003; Greenberg, 2010; Vargas & Gómez, 2003). It is once again evident that the SEAs are achieving a significant social impact within the Roma community, contributing directly to their social and educational inclusion. Data collected by the centre show a drastic reduction in absenteeism following the implementation of the SEAs. Because of this, absenteeism is almost non-existent in the centre. Before implementing SEAs, the absenteeism average was above 46%. In just one year, absenteeism decreased by more than 30%, dropping to 0.94% in the 2014–2015 academic year (García et al., 2016; Macías-Aranda, 2017). Finally, we should highlight that the participation of Roma families has also increased, particularly in terms of family education courses. According to internal data from the centre, the participation of Roma families increased by 30% following the first year in which the school began to implement this SEA (Cabré et al., 2014; Macías-Aranda, 2017). This participation was distributed among diverse family education programmes offered by the schools, including family education courses to learn Spanish and Catalan, Dialogic Literary Gatherings, and courses to obtain a secondary education certificate. Again, this participation is particularly relevant since it is 18 percentage points higher than the average participation of families in the Spanish educational system (Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports, 2014).

Conclusions Although there is still a long way to go to equalise the Roma gap in Spain, in this study, we have presented several political initiatives, the Integrated Plan for Roma People in Catalonia, and the Learning Communities, that are adopting social and educational actions recognised by the scientific community because its positive impact. As argued, the SEAs have shown to be significantly helpful in improving the social and educational inclusion of the Roma. In fact, the Roma community in Spain is claiming that the implementation of those actions are highly effective in overcoming social exclusion (Amador, 2016; Macías-Aranda & Redondo, 2012; Santiago & Maya, 2012). Both the SEAs’ approach and the Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia reveal the necessity for developing actions and policies based on evidence and in agreement with the international scientific community. However, this necessity is not only a question of utilising an

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    155 evidence-based approach. These policies and actions should focus on transforming the social situation of Roma people though the active participation of Roma in the design, development, implementation and assessment of these initiatives. In fact, Roma people have already rejected initiatives that reproduce their social exclusion, as they are not based on evidence nor do they take their voices into account (Amador, 2016; Macías-Aranda & Redondo, 2012). SEAs and those policies that implement them, such as the Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia, should be seen as effective tools for improving the Roma situation. They represent an authentic way to give the Roma community an opportunity to make their dreams come true, from graduating from high school to college access, without giving up their identity as a Roma, and with equal opportunities.

References Aiello, E., Mondejar, E., & Pulido, M. Á. (2013). Communicative methodology of research and recognition of the Roma people. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(2), 254–265. doi:10.1525/irqr.2013.6.2.254 Alvarez, P., García-Carrión, R., Puigvert, L., Pulido, C., & Schubert, T. (2018). Beyond the walls: The social reintegration of prisoners through the dialogic reading of classic universal literature in prison. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(4), 1043–1061. doi:10.1177/0306624X16672864 Amador, J. (2016). La ‘Roma response’ al modelo reproduccionista. La educación, nuestra escalera para la transformación social. [‘Roma response’ to Reproductionist Model. Education, our ladder for social transformation.] International Journal of Sociology of Education, 5(2), 144–163. doi:10.17583/rise.2016.2091 Amador, J., Flecha, R., & Sordé, T. (2018). Drugs and mental health problems among the Roma: Protective factors promoted by the Iglesia Evangélica Filadelfia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(2), 335. doi:10.3390/ijerph 15020335 Arnold, D., & Doctoroff, G. (2003). The early education of socioeconomically disadvantaged children. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 517–545. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.54.111301.145442 Atasanov, M. (2008). Gypsy pentecostals: The growth of the pentecostal movement among the Roma in Bulgaria and its revitalization of their communities. Wilmore, KY: Asbury Theological Seminary. Brüggemann, C. (2012). Roma education in comparative perspective. Analysis of the UNDP/ World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey 2011. Roma Inclusion Working Papers. Bratislava, Slovakia. Cabré, J., Gómez, A., Macías-Aranda, F., Martín, N., & Sampé, M. (2014). How Roma families’ education can impact Roma children’s academic success? The results of EduRom project. In European conference on educational research: The past, present and future of educational research in Europe. Porto (Portugal): European Educational Research Association. Cantón, M., Marcos, C., Medina, S., & Mena, I. (2004). Gitanos Pentecostales. Una mirada antropológica a la Iglesia Filadelfia en Andalucía. [Gypsy Pentecostals: An anthropological view to the Evangelic Church in Andalucía.] Sevilla, Spain: Signatura Demos. Carrasco-Garrido, P., de Andrés, A. L., Barrera, V. H., Jiménez-Trujillo, I., & JiménezGarcía, R. (2011). Health status of Roma women in Spain. European Journal of Public Health, 21(6), 793–798. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckq153

156    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. CIS. (2013). Percepción de la discriminación en España. Estudio no. 3000. [Perception of discrimination in Spain. Study num. 3000.] Madrid, Spain: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas, CIS. Retrieved from http://www.cis.es/cis/opencms/-Archivos/ Marginales/3000_3019/3000/es3000mar.pdf Council of Europe. (2012a). Descriptive glossary of terms relating to Roma issues. Retrieved from http://a.cs.coe.int/team20/cahrom/documents/Glossary%20Roma%20EN%20 version%2018%20May%202012.pdf Council of Europe. (2012b). Estimates and official numbers of Roma in Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/1680088ea9 CREA. (2010). Gitanos: de los mercadillos a la escuela y del instituto al futuro. Gypsies: From the street markets to the school and from the High School to the future.] Madrid, Spain: Ministry of Education, Instituto de Formación del Profesorado, Investigación e Innovación educativa (IFIIE). Retrieved from http://www.mecd.gob. es/dctm/ministerio/educacion/ifiie/lineas-investigacion-innovacion/educacion-intercultural/publicaciones-informes/publicaciones/gitanos-mercadillos-escuelas-institut os?documentId=0901e72b807b22e8 Damonti, P., & Arza, J. (2014). Exclusión en la comunidad gitana: Una brecha social que persiste y se agrava. [Exclusion in the Roma community: A social gap that persists and worsens.] Madrid, Spain: Fundación Foessa. Retrieved from http://www.foessa2014. es/informe/uploaded/documentostrabajo/15102014151523_8331.pdf De Clerck, G. A. (2009). Identity dynamics in Flemish deaf role models: An exploration of trends in emancipation processes in deaf communities and parallels with ethnic minorities in Europe. Volkskunde, 110(2), 117–136. Díez-Palomar, J., & Cabré, J. (2015). Using dialogic talk to teach mathematics: The case of interactive groups. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1299–1312. doi:10.1007/ s11858-015-0728-x Díez-Palomar, J., & Flecha, R. (2010). Comunidades de Aprendizaje: Un proyecto de transformación social y educative. [Schools as learning communities: A social and educational transformation project.] Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación Del Profesorado, 67(24.1), 19–30. EduRom Project. (2015). Fotonovela. Revista, 3–5. Retrieved from http://blocs.xtec.cat/ ceipmediterranicampclar/comunitats-daprenentatge/proyecto-edurom/ ENAR. (2013). Racism in Europe. ENAR Shadow report 2011–2012. Brussels, Belgium: ENAR Foundation; European Union; Open Society Foundations. Retrieved from http://cms.horus.be/files/99935/MediaArchive/publications/shadow%20report%20 2011-12/sha dowReport_EN_LR%20(3).pdf European Commission. (2010a). Commission staff working paper. Reducing early school leaving. Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Council Recommendation on policies to reduce early school leaving. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/doc/earlywp_en.pdf European Commission. (2010b). European platform against poverty and social exclusion. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. DG Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/social/home.jsp?langId=en European Commission. (2011a). Added value of research, innovation and science portfolio. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO11-520_en.pdf European Commission. (2011b, April 5). An EU framework for National Roma integration strategies up to 2020. COM (2011) 173 final. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/health/social_determinants/docs/com2011_173_en.pdf European Parliament. (2009, April 2). Resolution of 2 April 2009 on educating the children of migrants. (2008/2328(INI)). Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http://www. europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-20090202+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    157 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2009). Selected positive initiatives. The situation of Roma EU citizens moving to and settling in other EU Member States. Luxembourg, Europe: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/ files/roma_situation_settling_eu_en.pdf European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2012). The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Luxembourg, Europe: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_ uploads/2099-FRA-2012-Roma-at-a-glance_EN.pdf European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2014a). Roma survey: Data in focus discrimination against and living conditions of Roma women in 11 EU Member States. Luxembourg, Europe: EU-FRA. Retrieved from http://fra.europa. eu/en/publication/2014/discrimination-against-and-living-conditions-roma-women11-eu-member-states European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2014b). Roma survey: Data in focus Education: The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Luxembourg, Europe: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from http://fra. europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014_roma-survey_education_tk0113748enc.pdf European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA). (2014c). Roma survey: Data in focus poverty and employment: The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States. Vienna, Austria: EU-FRA. Retrieved from http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ fra-2014-roma-survey-employment_en.pdf Evans, M. (1992). An estimate of race and gender role-model effects in teaching high school. The Journal of Economic Education, 23(3), 209–217. doi:10.1080/0022 0485.1992.10844754 Fernández, M., Domínguez, C., & Flecha, A. (2004). Mujeres gitanas y mercado laboral: Mecanismos para superar su triple exclusion. [Roma women and the labor market: Mechanisms to overcome their triple exclusion.] Lan Harremanak: Revista de Relaciones Laborales, 11(2), 81–94. Retrieved from http://www.ehu.eus/ojs/index. php/Lan_Harremanak/article/view/5087/4941 Flecha, R. (2000). Sharing words. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Flecha, R. (2001–2004). WORKALÓ: The creation of new occupational patterns for cultural minorities: The gypsy case. Project. Fifth Community RTD Framework Programme of the European Union. Flecha, R. (2006–2011). INCLUD-ED. Strategies for inclusion and social cohesion from education in Europe. Integrated Project. Sixth Framework RTD Framework Programme of the European Union. Flecha, R. (Ed.). (2015). Successful educational actions for inclusion and social cohesion in Europe. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. Flecha, R., & Soler, M. (2013). Turning difficulties into possibilities: Engaging Roma families and students in school through dialogic learning. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(4), 451–465. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2013.819068 Flecha, R., Vargas, J., & Davila, A. (2004). Metodología comunicativa crítica en la investigación en ciencias sociales: La investigación WORKALÓ. [Critical communicative methodology in social science research: Research WORKALÓ.] LAN HARREMANAK, 2(11), 21–33. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/ articulo/1067684.pdf Fraser, A. (1992). The gypsies. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2007). Mapa sobre Vivienda y Comunidad Gitana en España. [Map on housing and the Roma community in Spain.] Madrid, Spain: FSG. Retrieved from https://www.gitanos.org/upload/40/14/47_48Dossier.pdf Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2010). Evaluación de la normalización educativa de las alumnas y los alumnos gitanos en Educación Primaria. [Evaluation of the educational

158    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. normalization of Roma students in primary education.] Madrid, Spain: IFIIE/ Instituto de la Mujer. Retrieved from https://www.gitanos.org/upload/76/26/normalizacion_educativa.pdf Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2012). Población Gitana Española y del Este de Europa: Empleo e Inclusión Social. [Roma population from Spain and Eastern Europe: Employment and social inclusion.] Madrid, Spain: FSG. Retrieved from https://www. gitanos.org/upload/60/99/empleo_e_inclusion_social.pdf Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2013). El alumnado gitano en secundaria. [Roma students in compulsory education.] Madrid, Spain: FSG & Ministerio de Educación Cultura y Deporte. Retrieved from https://gitanos.org/upload/92/20/EstudioSecundaria.pdf Gago-Cortés, C., & Novo-Corti, I. (2015). Políticas inclusivas de vivienda a través de la actuación municipal en la erradicación del chabolismo: El realojo del poblado de Culleredo (Galicia, España). [Inclusive housing policies through municipal action in the eradication of settlements: The relocation of the town of Culleredo (Galicia, Spain).] Gestión Y Política Pública, 24(1), 131–167. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/gpp/v24n1/v24n1a4.pdf García, A. (2006). La familia en la comunidad gitana. [The family in the Roma community.] In D. La Parra (Ed.), Situación social y tendencias de cambio en la Comunidad Gitana (pp. 25–43). Barcelona, Spain: UPNA & Alter. García, C., Álvarez, P., & Macías-Aranda, F. (2016). Successful participation of Roma in family education: Findings from the EduRom project. In AERA annual meeting: Public Scholars to educate diverse democracies. AERA, American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. García-Espinel, T. (2016). Political impact of the European research on the Roma People. The case of the Integral Plan for the Roma People in Catalonia. PhD thesis. University of Granada, Granada, Spain. Girbés-Peco, S., Macías-Aranda, F., & Álvarez-Cifuentes, P. (2015). De la escuela gueto a una Comunidad de Aprendizaje: Un estudio de caso sobre la superación de la pobreza a través de una educación de éxito. [From a Ghetto school to a learning community: A case study on the overcoming of poverty through a successful education.] RIMCIS – International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences, 4(1), 88–116. doi:10.17583/rimcis.2015.1470 Greenberg, J. (2010). Report on Roma education today: From slavery to segregation and beyond. Columbia Law Review, 110(4), 919–1001. Hancock, I. (2004). Romani origins and Romani identity: A reassessment of the arguments. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars’ Press. Hancock, I. (2006). On Romani origins and identity. Austin, TX: RADOC, The Romani Archives and Documentation Center at the University of Texas – Austin. Retrieved from http://www.radoc.net/radoc.php?doc=art_b_history_origins&lang=es&articles= Hanushek, E. A., & Wößmann, L. (2006). Does educational tracking affect performance and inequality? Differences-in-differences evidence across countries. The Economic Journal, 116(510), C63–C76. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01076.x INCLUD-ED Consortium. (2009). Actions for success in schools in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Retrieved from http://www.includ-ed.eu/es/ resource/actions-success-schools-europe Instituto Natura. (2017). Comunidades de aprendizaje. ¿Quién participa? [Schools as Learning Communities. Who participate?]. Retrieved from http://www.comunidaddeapren-dizaje.com.es/quien-participa Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia. (2017–2020). 4th edition. Catalan Government. Retrieved from http://treballiaferssocials.gencat.cat/ca/ambits_tematics/accio_ comunitaria_i_voluntariat/accio_comunitaria/poble-gitano/pla-integral/2017-2020/

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    159 Jiménez-González, N. (2009). I Rromaní Chib, la lengua de los gitanos. [I Rromaní Chib, the language of the Roma people.] Valladolid, Spain: Fundación Ateneo Cultural “Jesús Pereda”. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/29750498/romani_chib_la_lengua_de_los_gitanos.pdf Jiménez-González, N. (Ed.). (2017). Guía de recursos contra el Antigitanismo. [Resources guide against antigypsyism.] Alicante, Spain: Federación Autonómica de Asociaciones Gitanas de la Comunidad Valenciana (FAGA). Retrieved from https:// www.plataformaong.org/ARCHIVO/documentos/biblioteca/1457610965_ca002_ guia_antigitanismo.pdf Klopfenstein, K. (2005). Beyond test scores: The impact of Black teacher role models on rigorous Math taking. Contemporary Economic Policy, 23(3), 416–428. doi:10.1093/ cep/byi031 Ladson-Billings, G. (2016). And then there is this thing called the curriculum: Organization, imagination, and mind. Educational Researcher, 45(2), 100–104. doi:10.3102/00131 89X16639042 La Parra, D., Gil-González, D., & Jiménez, A. (2013). Los procesos de exclusión social y la salud del pueblo gitano en España. [The processes of social and health exclusion of Roma people in Spain.] Gaceta Sanitaria, 27(5), 385–386. doi:10.1016/j.gaceta.2013.05.001 Llopis, A., Villarejo, B., Soler, M., & Alvarez, P. (2016). (Im)Politeness and interactions in dialogic literary gatherings. Journal of Pragmatics, 94, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j. pragma.2016.01.004 Lucas, S. R., & Berends, M. (2002). Sociodemographic diversity, correlated achievement, and de facto tracking. Sociology of Education, 75(4), 328–348. doi:10.2307/3090282 Macías-Aranda, F. (2017). Contributions of the Roma people to overcome poverty and antigypsyism through successful educational actions. Ph.D. thesis. University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. Macías-Aranda, F., & Flecha, R. (2013). Hacia una formación del profesorado para la igualdad del Pueblo Gitano. [Towards a teacher training for the Roma People equality.] Enseñantes con Gitanos, (30), 75–84. Retrieved from http://aecgit.pangea.org/ boletines/boletin30/REVISTA_30.pdf Macías-Aranda, F., & Redondo, G. (2012). Pueblo gitano, género y educación: Investigar para excluir o investigar para transformar. [Roma people, gender and education: Re-search to exclude or to transform.] International Journal of Sociology of Education, 1(1), 71–92. doi:10.4471/rise.2012.04 Martín-Pérez, M., Hernández, V., de Andrés, A. L., Jiménez-Trujillo, I., Jiménez-García, R., & Carrasco-Garrido, P. (2015). Predictors of medication use in the Roma population in Spain: A population-based national study. Public Health, 129(5), 453–459. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2015.01.028 Matras, Y. (2002). Romani: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Maylor, U. (2009). ‘They do not relate to Black people like us’: Black teachers as role models for Black pupils. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 1–21. doi:10.1080/02680930802382946 Melgar, P., Larena, R., Ruiz, L., & Rammel, S. (2011). How to move from power-based to dialogic relations? Lessons from Roma women. European Journal of Education, 46(2), 219–227. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2011.01477.x Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports. (2014). La participación de las familias en la educación escolar. [Family participation in schools.] Madrid, Spain: Consejo Escolar de Estado. MECD. Retrieved from https://www.mecd.gob.es/dam/jcr:8c2e037a8673-4911-8594-d7aa12214d87/estudioparticipacion-pdf.pdf

160    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity. (2011). Diagnóstico social de la comunidad gitana en España. Un análisis contrastado de la Encuesta del CIS a Hogares de Población Gitana 2007. [Social diagnosis of the Roma community in Spain. A con-trasted analysis of the 2007 CIS Survey of Roma Households.] Madrid, Spain: Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equity. Retrieved from https://www.msssi. gob.es/ssi/familiasInfancia/inclusionSocial/poblacionGitana/docs/diagnosticosocial_autores.pdf Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity. (2012). Estrategia Nacional para la Inclusión Social de la Población Gitana en España 2012–2020. [National Strategy for the Social Inclusion of Roma people in Spain 2012–2020.] Madrid, Spain: Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity. Retrieved from https://www.msssi.gob.es/ ssi/familiasInfancia/inclusionSocial/poblacionGitana/docs/WEB_POBLACION_ GITANA_2012.pdf Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity. (2016). Segunda Encuesta Nacional de Salud a Población Gitana 2014. [Second National Health Survey on Roma Population 2014.] Madrid, Spain: Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equity. Retrieved from http://www.msc.es/en/profesionales/saludPublica/prevPromocion/promocion/ desigualdadSalud/docs/ENS2014PG.pdf Ministry of Social Welfare and Family. Catalan Government. (2005). Estudi sobre la població gitana de Catalunya. [Study on Roma community in Catalonia.] Barcelona, Spain: Generalitat de Catalunya. Retrieved from http://treballiaferssocials.gencat. cat/web/.content/01departament/08publicacions/ambits_tematics/serveis_socials/08 estudipoblaciogitanacat05/2005estudipoblaciogitanacat.pdf Minority Access Inc. (2014). Minority access’ role models project. Retrieved from http:// www.minorityaccess.org/role.html# Oakes, J. (1995). Two cities’ tracking and within-school segregation. Teachers College Record, 96(4), 681–690. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=49 O’Higgins, N. (2015). Ethnicity and gender in the labor market in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Cambridge Journal of Economics, (39), 631–654. doi:10.1093/cje/bev002 Personal Data Protection Act 15. (1999, December 13). Retrieved from https://www.boe.es/ buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-1999-23750 Pozdnyakova, M. E., & Moiseeva, V. V. (2008). The role of religious communities in countering drug abuse. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 78(4), 390–396. doi:10.1134/S1019331608040102 Preoteasa, A. M. (2013). Roma women and precarious work: Evidence from Romania, Bulgaria, Italy and Spain. Revista de Cercetare Şi Intervenţie Socială, (43), 155–168. Retrieved from https://www.rcis.ro/images/documente/rcis43_10.pdf Pulido, C., & Zepa, B. (2010). La interpretación interactiva de los textos a través de las tertulias literarias dialógicas. [The interactive interpretation of the texts through the dialogic literary gatherings.] Revista Signos, 43(2), 295–309. Retrieved from https:// scielo.conicyt.cl/pdf/signos/v43s2/a03.pdf Pustjens, H., Van de Gaer, E., Van Damme, J., & Onghena, P. (2008). Curriculum choice and success in the first two grades of secondary education: Students, classes, or schools? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(2), 155–182. doi:10.1080/09243450802047923 Rezai-Rashti, G. M., & Martino, W. J. (2010). Black male teachers as role models: Resisting the homogenizing impulse of gender and racial affiliation. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 37–64. doi:10.3102/0002831209351563 Ríos, O., Herrero, C., & Rodríguez, H. (2013). From access to education. The revolutionary transformation of schools as learning communities. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(2), 239–253. doi:10.1525/irqr.2013.6.2.239

Moving Towards Roma Inclusion in Spain    161 Rodríguez Lopez-Ros, S. (2011). Gitanidad: otra manera de ver el mundo. [Being Roma: Another way of seeing the world.] Barcelona, Spain: Kairós. Rosenbaum, J. E. (1976). Making inequality: The hidden curriculum of high school tracking. New York, NY: Wiley. Sánchez Ortega, M. H. (1994a). Evolución y contexto histórico de los gitanos españoles. [Evolution and historical context of the Spanish Roma.] In T. San Román (Ed.), Entre la marginación y el racismo. Reflexiones sobre la vida de los gitanos (pp. 13–60). Madrid, Spain: Alianza Editorial. Sánchez Ortega, M. H. (1994b). Los gitanos españoles desde su salida de la India hasta los primeros conflictos en la península. [The Spanish Roma from their departure from India to the first conflicts in the peninsula.] Espacio Tiempo Y Forma, 4(7), 319–354. Sánchez Ortega, M. H. (2009). La minoría gitana en el siglo XVII: Represión, discriminación legal, intentos de asentamiento e integración [The Roma minority in the seventeenth century: Repression, legal discrimination, attempts at settlement and integration.] Anales de Historia Contemporánea, 25(25), 75–90. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/2921603.pdf Santiago, C., & Maya, O. (2012). Segregación escolar del alumnado gitano en España. [School segregation of Roma students in Spain.] Córdoba, Spain: Federación Nacional de Asociaciones de Mujeres Gitanas KAMIRA & Fundación Mario Maya. Retrieved from http://federacionkamira.es/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ Informe-de-Segregaci%C3%B3n.pdf Santos-Pitanga, T., Macías-Aranda, F., Amador-López, J., & Cortés-Cortés, D. (2016). Samudaripen, el Genocidio Gitano: ¿Repetiremos la Historia? [Samudaripen, the Roma genocide: Will we repeat the history?] – Revista Científica de Estudios Sobre Interculturalidad, 2(1), 2–29. doi:10.17583/recei.2016.1897 Sordé, T. (2012–2014). TRANSROMA. Estrategias de movilidad, retorno y prácticas transnacionales entre población gitana rumana [TRANSROMA. Strategies of mobili-ty, return and transnational practices among Romanian Roma.] Spain: RTD National Program of the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spanish Government). Sordé-Martí, T. (2006). Les reivindicacions educatives de la dona gitana. [Educational claims of the Roma Women.] Barcelona, Spain: Galerada. Sordé-Martí, T., & Macías-Aranda, F. (2017). Making Roma rights a reality at the local level: A Spanish case study. In J. Bhabha, A. Mirga, & M. Matache (Eds.), Realizing Roma rights (pp. 187–229). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Terwel, J. (2005). Curriculum differentiation: Multiple perspectives and developments in education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(6), 653–670. doi:10.1080/00220270 500231850 United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2016). Human development report 2016. Human development for everyone. New York, NY: UNDP. Retrieved from http://hdr. undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf Valls, R. (2008–2010). MIXTRIN. Formas de agrupación del alumnado y su relación con el éxito escolar: ‘Mixture, streaming e inclusion’. [Grouping students forms and their relationship to school success: ‘Mixture, streaming and inclusion’.] Spain: RTD National Programme of the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spanish Government). Valls, R. (2012–2014). Actuaciones Socioeducativas de Éxito para la Superación de la Pobreza. [Successful socioeducational actions to overcome poverty.] Spain: RTD National Program of the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Spanish Government). Valls, R., & Kyriakides, L. (2013). The power of Interactive Groups: How diversity of adults volunteering in classroom groups can promote inclusion and success for children of vulnerable minority ethnic populations. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(1), 17–33. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2012.749213

162    Fernando Macías-Aranda et al. Vargas, J. & Gómez, J. (2003). Why Romà do not like mainstream schools: Voices of a people without territory. Harvard Educational Review, 73(4), 559–590. doi:10.17763/ haer.73.4.k6807432592612j3 Wiatrowski, M. D., Hansell, S., Massey, C. R., & Wilson, D. L. (1982). Curriculum tracking and delinquency. American Sociological Review, 47(1), 151–170. doi:10.2307/2095049 Woessmann, L., & Schuetz, G. (2006). Efficiency and equity in European education and training systems. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, Education and Culture. Retrieved from http://www.eenee.de/dms/EENEE/Analytical_Reports/EENEE_ AR1.pdf Yancey, A. K. (1998). Building positive self-image in adolescents in foster care: The use of role models in an interactive group approach. Adolescence, 33(130), 253–267.

Chapter 8

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden: Achievements after Year 2000 and Challenges for the Future Christina Rodell Olgaç Abstract In this chapter, the author characterises the situation of Roma in the educational system of Sweden, focusing on achievements after year 2000 and on challenges for the future. A brief historical background is initially presented to frame the discussion, including the processes of getting access to the formal educational system, followed by an overview of the socioeconomic situation of Roma and a presentation of the recognition of Roma as a national minority in 2000 and the Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2032. The second part of the chapter is focusing on the educational situation of Roma, more specifically on the years from 2000 until the present, also presenting a Roma example and findings from a study concerning higher education and the first course for Roma mediators working in schools. The conclusion discusses some of the achievements reached during recent years as well as challenges and priorities for the future of the Roma minority. Keywords: Sweden; Roma minority; national minority; Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2032; educational system; Roma mediators; challenges for the future

The Roma Minority in Sweden This chapter analyses the educational situation of the Roma in Sweden. A brief historical background will be initially presented to frame the discussion, including the processes of getting access to the formal educational system, followed by an overview of the socioeconomic situation of Roma and a presentation of the recognition of Roma as national minority in 2000 and the Strategy for Roma

Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 163–182 Copyright © 2020 by Christina Rodell Olgaç Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191014

164    Christina Rodell Olgaç Inclusion 2012–2032. The second part of the chapter is focusing on the educational situation, more specifically on the years from 2000 until the present, also presenting a Roma example and findings from a study concerning higher education and the first course for Roma mediators working in schools. The conclusion discusses some of the achievements reached during recent years as well as challenges and priorities for the future of the Roma minority. Roma are part of the history of Sweden probably since the fifteenth century, with the first historical document known until today dated in 1512 when a group of Roma arrived in Stockholm. Sweden and Finland were united into one country for more than 600 years until 1809, when Finland became part of the Grand Dutchy of Russia. Linguistic data indicate that the Finnish Kaale Roma and the Travellers probably originate from the oldest Roma groups in the country (Carling, Demetri, Dimiter-Taikon, Lindell, & Schwartz, 2016; Pulma, 2015). Towards the end of the nineteenth century after the abolition of slavery in Wallachia and Moldavia, groups of Kelderash Roma arrived into the country through Finland and Denmark. Today this group is sometimes called ‘Swedish Roma’. During the twentieth century however, the borders of the country were closed for Roma between 1914 and 1954. During this period, the number of Roma still living in the country in 1952 was estimated to be approximately 700 individuals, which excludes the number of Travellers living there at the time (Ohlsson Al Fakir, 2015; Takman, 1976). In the 1960s and 1970s groups of Lovara from Poland, Hungary and the former Czechoslovakia arrived in the country, and towards the end of the 1980s and during the 1990s many refugees from the war in former Yugoslavia and from the Balkans fled to Sweden (SOU, 2010). All these various groups have led to a very diverse Roma population in the country today. Already in 1933 issues concerning the need for Roma children in the country to be able to attend school was highlighted by Johan Dimitri Taikon, a Kelderash Roma, who wrote a letter to the National Agency for Education (Skolöverstyrelsen) emphasising that the authorities had neglected this question (Sjögren, 2010, p. 190). In the 1940s and 1950s temporary mobile schools were set up by the Foundation of the Swedish Gypsy Mission (Stiftelsen svensk zigenarmission). Funded by the Swedish state, the Mission organised mobile schooling during the summer months in the camps teaching mainly basic literacy and arithmetic. Although attending school was compulsory since 1842, it took 100 years until the Swedish population attended school on a regular basis (Hartman, 2012). It was not until the late 1960s that Roma were able to begin attending schools on a general (regular) basis. One crucial fact to this change was the influence of the publication of the book Zigenerska by the Roma activist Katarina Taikon (1963), where she highlighted the precarious situation of Roma in the country. Katarina Taikon and her sister Rosa Taikon, who later became a famous silversmith, were important activists in the 1960s and 1970s in the debate on the socioeconomic, educational and housing situation of the Roma population in the country. They participated in numerous meetings with politicians, in demonstrations and discussions. In 1964, Katarina Taikon also met with Dr Martin Luther King Jr. in Stockholm. A famous photo from 1 May 1965 shows Katarina Taikon with a group of Roma participating in a demonstration while carrying a poster with the text ‘Support adult education’. Katarina Taikon passed

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    165 away in 1995 after several years of illness, but her sister Rosa continued the struggle for Roma rights (Mohtadi, 2012; Taikon, 1967). Even today many of the Romani initiatives originate from the legacy of Katarina Taikon.

The Heterogeneity of the Roma Population in Sweden Out of Sweden’s 10 million inhabitants, approximately 24% of the population is of foreign decent (Statistics Sweden, 2017). The Roma population comprises approximately 50,000–100,000 persons, but these figures vary and are only estimates as Sweden does not allow for ethnic registration. It is also the Nordic country with the largest number of Roma. As mentioned above, Roma are a very heterogeneous population comprising many diverse groups, speaking different varieties of Roma and adhering to various religious affiliations. Nowadays the Roma are sedentary living all over Sweden, mainly in the suburban areas with large migrant populations of some of the biggest cities such as Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö. Since year 2000 with the Swedish ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the Roma together with the Samis, Tornedalers, Swedish Finns and Jews are recognised as official historical national minorities. The ratification of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages the same year recognises Sami, Finnish, Meänkieli, Romani chib, and Yiddish as official minority languages (SOU, 2010). This charter explicitly supports and protects these languages ‘as an important element in Sweden’s cultural heritage and modern society’ (SOU, 1997, p. 21). Since 2010, the County Administrative Board in Stockholm County and the Sami Parliament are primarily responsible for the coordination and continued monitoring of the country-wide implementation of Sweden’s minority policy (Government Offices Sweden, 2016).

Still Marginalised in the Society The social situation of the Roma minority in Sweden is still characterised by social, economic and political exclusion and marginalisation. Many of the adults are often unemployed or underemployed. The group’s life expectancy and living standards are comparatively lower than that of the average Swede. Although the situation for Roma is similar to the rest of Europe, the level of exclusion may be different though, since the welfare systems assure that no-one, including marginalized Roma families, falls below a certain poverty line. Human and minority rights including antidiscriminatory laws and a number of institutions to ensure basic rights are in place, but Roma access is limited because of the low level of education and lack of awareness of their rights. (SOU, 2010, pp. 35–36) According to the Government Report ‘Roma Rights: a Strategy for Roma in Sweden’ ‘health problems start earlier, there are lifestyle-related health problems dating back from the times before Roma were resident and life expectancy is judged to be clearly

166    Christina Rodell Olgaç below average’ (SOU, 2010, p. 36). The health services also lack information and consideration concerning special needs of Roma, and the Public Health Agency proposes creating better conditions for the minority in order to promote more participation and trust (Folkhälsomyndigheten, 2018). A study on Romani empowerment and inclusion in Sweden emphasises the need of health literacy for an improved state of health for Roma (Crondahl, 2015). Through history antiziganism has been part of Swedish cultural memory (Selling, 2013, p. 196), including in school contexts (Ministry of Culture Sweden, 2015; Rodell Olgaç, 2006; Sjögren, 2010), and is one of the reasons for the marginalisation of the minority. The Commission against Antiziganism stresses that the human rights situation of Roma is still serious in the country and affects opportunities for many Roma in ways such as access to housing, education, the labour market, social services and health and medical care, and the measures taken have not been sufficient (SOU, 2016, p. 20). One example of this discrimination is the discovery of a register covering Roma of all ages set up by the police in Skåne in 2013, again causing an even more weakened trust in the authorities.

The Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2032 At the beginning of 2012 the Swedish government launched a Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2032 (henceforth known as the Strategy). The overall goal for this 20-year Strategy is that a Roma who turns 20 years of age in 2032 to have the same opportunities in life as a non-Roma (Regeringens skrivelse, 2011, p. 10). The focus of the Strategy are areas such as education, housing, employment, health, social care and security; culture and language and organisation of civil society. The training of mediators in school and social work are among the initiatives within the framework of the Strategy, as will be explained further below. Higher education is not explicitly addressed in the Strategy. ‘Instead the government presents the adult education and vocational training systems that are available to all young people who are unemployed or prefer a vocational to an academic route’ (Alexiadou & Norberg, 2017, p. 51). Five pilot municipalities, Luleå, Linköping, Gothenburg, Helsingborg and Malmö, were selected to carry out development work and methods in cooperation with Roma locally to be disseminated around the country 2012–2015. Another five municipalities have also been selected to participate for a two-year period to carry out development activities within the framework of the Strategy (Government Offices Sweden, 2016).

Cultural and Linguistic Diversity Linguistically there are an estimated number of more than 20 different varieties of Romani spoken in the country among the different groups in addition to most European languages. Some of the major varieties are Arli, Kaale, Kelderash, Lovara and Scandoromani, but also Djambazi, Gurbeti, Romungri and others (Bijvoet & Fraurud, 2007; Carling et al., 2016). The Language Council (Språkrådet) is the primary institution for language cultivation in Sweden and a department of the official language authority, The Institute for Language and Folklore

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    167 (Institutet för språk och folkminnen). The Council is monitoring the development of spoken and written Swedish as well as of all other languages spoken in Sweden, including promoting the five official recognised minority languages. The Institute also administers a government grant scheme with the aim to promote better acquirement and use of the national minority languages, including support to activities with a focus on children and young people. The Institute is publishing lexicon and word lists in different varieties of Romani as well as providing advice on language issues in Romani.1 Swedish research concerning Roma groups within the field of Heritage Studies has been limited and Roma are generally invisible in traditional historical sources. Investigations concerning, for example, old camp sites and the traditional routes of travelling are currently taking place in some regions of the country, as well as the finding of old photographs of Roma to be archived. This work is however still in its initial phase and needs to be expanded. Holmberg (2014) states that any presentation of the history of Sweden must observe that it is a diverse and far from homogenous history.

Roma in the Swedish Education System The Swedish Education System In Sweden, reforms in the 1960s led to the unification of diverse types of schools in order to create one compulsory school. The main responsibility for the education system today lies with the municipalities and authorities responsible for both private and independent schools. The educational system today is very decentralised to the municipalities, where the municipalities are obliged to provide preschool or family day-care homes for children from one year of age and upwards when their parents are working or studying, unemployed, or on parental leave. From the age of six children have the right to start in the preschool class. The preschool class is voluntary, and the municipalities are obliged to organise preschool classes with creative work and play as important parts of the activities. Attendance at school is compulsory for all children aged seven to 16 (six—to 16 from autumn 2018) and free of charge.2 Compulsory schooling includes comprehensive school, schools for the deaf and hearing-impaired, and for children with learning disabilities. There are special school provisions for the Sami, the indigenous population. Having finished compulsory school, all young people in Sweden are entitled to three years of schooling at upper secondary school, free of charge. In terms of pedagogy and curriculum organization, Sweden has avoided differentiation of pupils by ability, emphasizing individualized teaching within a comprehensive classroom organization, and support for ‘mother tongue’ education for children who speak a language other than Swedish at home. (Alexiadou & Norberg, 2017, p. 40) 1

See www.sprakochfolkminnen.se See www.skolverket.se

2

168    Christina Rodell Olgaç The recognition of national minorities in Sweden in 2000 has led to certain curricula changes. The curriculum for the compulsory school system stipulates that the school is responsible for ensuring that each pupil on completing compulsory school: […] has obtained knowledge about the cultures, languages, religion and history of the national minorities, Jews, Romanies, indigenous Samis, Swedish and Tornedal Finns. (National Agency for Education, 2011, p. 15) The national curricula were introduced in 2011 and the knowledge about the five national minorities is more emphasised, especially in the History, Civics and Swedish syllabi. In addition, amendments to the Educational Act which entered into force on 1 July 2015 give pupils who belong to any of the national minorities a stronger right to mother tongue tuition in their national minority language. The amendment means that a pupil who belongs to a national minority no longer needs to have basic knowledge of their national minority language in order for the education organizer to be obliged to offer mother tongue tuition. (Council of Europe, 2016, p. 54) Roma teachers with teacher diplomas are however still rare in the country. The general knowledge concerning the national minorities and especially Roma is still limited at school and in the society at large (cf. Rodell Olgaç, 2011, 2015) and has been criticised by, for example, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). In 2012 they recommended ‘that the Swedish authorities redouble their efforts to combat the prejudice and stereotyping faced by Roma’ and further strongly encourages the Swedish authorities to continue and extend their initiatives to promote better knowledge of Roma among the population, improve Roma’s confidence in themselves and transcend the mutual distrust between Roma and the majority population, in particular by training mediators. (ECRI, 2012, p. 34) This lack of knowledge has far reaching consequences for Roma pupils and their school success, an issue that will be discussed further below. Adult education in Sweden is organised in many different forms throughout the municipalities and in folk high schools, folkhögskolor, that is, independent adult education colleges.3 The municipal adult education in Sweden provides tuition for immigrants as well as compulsory levels, upper secondary levels and special education for adults with development disabilities or brain impairments. The goals 3

See www.sverigesfolkhogskolor.se

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    169 are to support and encourage adults in their learning processes as well as providing opportunities for knowledge development and competence including promoting personal development. The municipalities are obliged to provide municipal adult education on two levels, compulsory school level and upper secondary level, which correspond to the compulsory school and the upper secondary school.4 The 148 folk high schools independently decide what courses to provide. This leads to a wide range of profiles in between them. The courses can be of various lengths, some of them also providing alternatives to the municipal adult education. Courses can also be oriented towards specific areas of interest such as music, art, the environment, international issues or targeting a certain profession such as youth recreation leader, treatment assistant, sign language interpreter, or certain groups as people with various disabilities and immigrants.5 There are some folk high schools that also have offered courses directed specifically to Roma such as Agnesbergs folkhögskola, Sundbybergs folkhögskola and Skarpnäcks folkhögskola. Among these courses have been compulsory level and upper secondary levels as well vocational training of, for example, child caretakers and teacher assistants. These vocational training courses have however often not led to employment (SOU, 2010). All higher education in Sweden is offered by public sector or by independent education providers granted degree-awarding powers by the Government, amounting to 50 public sector higher education providers. Most of them are public sector university colleges. The Swedish system of student finance combines grants and loans to all who can benefit from it regardless of socioeconomic background and where in Sweden a student is living.6 In summary, Swedish policy requires that the education system provides for all inhabitants, irrespective of age or location. Despite the policies in place, the system still fails to meet the needs and demands of Roma, as will be explained further below.

Educational Attainment of the Roma Providing information in detail on the educational attainment of Roma pupils in Sweden is difficult as there is not any registration based on ethnicity in general, also in relation to school results. The only statistics available concerns mother tongue education, where the municipalities report to the National Agency for Education the number of pupils entitled to tuition in their mother tongue, and those pupils who participate each year. Figures reported from the municipalities show that Roma pupils entitled to and participating in mother tongue education has more than redoubled between 2001 and 2017. In the autumn of 2016 around 2,518 pupils were reported to be entitled to mother tongue tuition and 804 participated. The figures for pupils entitled to tuition reported is however still much lower than the estimated total of Roma pupils in the country. There are

4

See www.skolverket.se See www.skolverket.se 6 See www.english/uka.se 5

170    Christina Rodell Olgaç several reasons for these low figures, for example, that many families and pupils do not mention their Roma background, lack of information communicated to the parents concerning the right to mother tongue education as well as the still limited knowledge among school staff about the extended rights to mother tongue education for national minority children. Another factor is the lack of mother tongue teachers available in many of the municipalities, and the many different varieties of Romani spoken in the country (SOU, 2017, pp. 274–275). The interest in tuition among Roma has risen during recent years, but out of a total of 39 mother tongue teachers in the country, only three of them have a higher education degree. Many of the unqualified teachers are those who have been attending a course for mother tongue teachers commissioned by the National Agency for Education at Södertörn University, as will be explained further (SOU, 2017, p. 468). There are just a few studies that can illustrate some general tendencies concerning the educational attainment of Roma in the country and more recent developments. Two studies limited to the situation in Malmö in southern Sweden estimate that few Roma children attend compulsory school to the end of the ninth year, and the completion rate is estimated to be low (Liedholm & Lindberg, 2010; Söderman & Ström, 2008). A study of 27 projects for Roma children and youth organised by Romani NGOs between 1996 and 2009 funded by the Swedish Inheritance Fund (Allmänna Arvsfonden), identifies four main target areas that these projects were dedicated to; cultural and linguistic revitalisation, issues concerning school and education, drug and crime prevention, and future leadership among young Roma. Many activities were also directed to the dissemination of knowledge about the Roma minority to the mainstream society. This indicates an engagement and interest in the school situation of Roma children and youth also among Roma NGOs, as well as the engagement in trying to diminish the lack of knowledge about Roma in the society at large (Rodell Olgaç, 2011, 2012). A study for the National Agency for Education concerning the educational situation for Roma in the five pilot municipalities, which were selected within the framework of the Strategy for Roma Inclusion, provides more information. Through the study based on interviews with Roma parents and pupils as well as Roma and non-Roma teachers and other school staff (N = 81), it was possible to identify some key aspects of concern (Rodell Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2013). Findings from this study show that documentation of the school situation of Roma pupils was scarce, and only those municipalities with previous cooperation with Roma had more documentation as well as school staff who were more aware of their situation. The study indicates that more Roma children do attend preschool, but the compulsory primary and secondary school are still the focus, and even fewer continue to upper secondary school. The non-Roma staff interviewed put a particular emphasis on the high absenteeism among many of the pupils. The study further confirmed that the knowledge about the historical and contemporary situation of Roma among the teachers and staff in all these municipalities is still scarce. Despite a modern understanding of culture as a culmination of processes in construction over time and place, the Roma culture is still often perceived in mainstream society through an essentialist understanding of the concept of culture (cf. Rodell Olgaç, 2006). Therefore, blaming the Roma culture for the

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    171 socioeconomic living conditions of Roma becomes a simple explanation for a very complex situation and often an excuse for a lack of deeper engagement when, for example, a pupil is absent from school. Another consequence of this lack of knowledge among non-Roma school staff is, according to some of the interviewees, tendencies to report frequent absence from school to the social ­welfare services, often without having a previous dialogue with the parents, leading to suspect an over usage of forced custody of Roma children. Therefore, some parents tend to send their children to school out of fear of otherwise running the risk of losing their children to the social welfare authorities. What a meaningful attendance at school would be for the Roma pupils under such circumstances, was not mentioned in the interviews. But the situation is not unambiguous. There were also parents who reported that their children were successful at school as well as popular among his or her peers, with pupils confirming this view. Some also mentioned individual young Roma who had continued to upper secondary education, and one or two to higher education. The study also discovered that some of the families, especially those originating from former Yugoslavia, were still suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from the war, with a risk of secondary traumatisation in the next generation. After such a long time, no support had been provided to these families, resulting in ongoing distress and anxiety among these families. In summary, this study indicates that the home– school relationship is still weak and lacks mutual trust and respect. Despite this, many of the parents interviewed expressed that they do want that their children to succeed at school and therefore wish for a better home–school communication (Rodell Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2013).

The Closing Down of the Only Bilingual Roma Class A recent backlash in the bilingual education for Roma children in the country was caused in the autumn of 2016 by the Swedish Schools Inspectorate through its critical report on a comprehensive municipal school in southern Stockholm published in August 2016 (Skolinspektionen, 2016). A special focus in the report was put on the Roma Culture Class, Roma Kulturklass, which for almost 20 years had been a part of this school. The Roma Culture Class comprised a multilingual group of pupils speaking different varieties of Roma and was the only bilingual Roma class in Sweden and had for several years been considered an example of good practice (see e.g. Rodell Olgaç, 2013; Rodell Olgaç, Demetri, & DimiterTaikon, 2010). The pupils were taught by three Roma teachers with formal teacher education diplomas, two of them also with one-year master’s degrees in education, and a trained Roma mediator. The class started in the 1990s as a joint initiative of these teachers, the Roma community, mainly Kelderash and Lovara, and the local school aiming at an increased collaboration between the families, their children and the school. The class was set up with the intention to be more inclusive and to prevent the absenteeism, especially among the older Roma pupils at the school. While using the national curriculum, the teachers drew from the Roma family learning styles including the use of their mother tongue. The class was of mixedage groups between five and 16 years of age. A close cooperation with the parents

172    Christina Rodell Olgaç and relatives was fundamental to establish trust between the school and the community. Through the years more older pupils in their early teens joined the class from other schools in the Stockholm area where they had experienced marginalisation, antiziganism and educational failure. In the class, they were provided with a second chance to take up studying together with identity strengthening support from the teachers. At the end of 2016 there were about 30–35 pupils in the class. The report from the Inspectorate mentioned especially the fact that pupils were not reaching the goals stipulated in the curricula and were stagnated on a low level of achievement and high level of absenteeism. The teaching was also criticised for being either too advanced or not demanding enough, thus not meeting the equity in the education provided to all pupils in the country. No mentioning of the large group of older pupils arriving late in their school years from other schools in the Stockholm area with previous school failures to the class was done in the report. Neither did the report demonstrate any understanding of how the teachers also were trying to provide a knowledge content that pupils of different age groups had missed in their previous school years. No references to the general school situation of Roma pupils in Sweden or to national minority rights were made in the report. The Inspectorate stated that the City of Stockholm would be fined, if changes were not taken, a common way to put pressure on the municipalities and for the schools to take measures to improve the situation. Several types of disinformation and rumours were starting to be spread in the media, also among Roma, concerning the teachers and the class.7 The sanctuary territory that the teachers had created was gradually destroyed and the confidence and respect for their educational work was publicly questioned and undermined. During this entire process, the parents always expressed that they felt that their children were safe in the hands of the teachers in the class and their children were happy to come to the class, something that the parents had not experienced in other schools. Instead of supporting a positive and constructive development and improvement in the class, in December 2016 the political Board of Education of the City of Stockholm (Utbildningsnämnden) decided to ‘reorganise’ the activities of the class. Since the beginning of 2017, the class is closed, and the pupils dispersed to different schools, only a handful remain in the school. Many of them do not have any mother tongue tuition today. A recent report from the government on the national minority languages in schools from November 2017, states that despite having formal rights to bilingual education for many years, the situation has not improved in the country and proposes to the government that bilingual education in the national minority languages should be established and further developed (SOU, 2017).

Roma in Higher Education Although higher education is not explicitly addressed in the Strategy for Roma Inclusion, except for the need of trained teachers in Romani, new initiatives

7

See, for example, http://www.expressen.se/ledare/eric-erfors/ett-cyniskt-svek-mot-deromska-eleverna/

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    173 concerning Roma getting access to higher education have taken place, especially concentrated to Södertörn University.8 This University was funded in 1996 with the intention to widen access and attract more young people to higher education, especially from the southern suburbs of Stockholm that also have large migrant populations where the enrolments were scarce. It is the main multidisciplinary research site concerning Romani Studies in Sweden today, with a history of more than a decade at the University. In close cooperation with the Roma minority several scholars are working on issues concerning Roma history, religion, antiziganism, teacher education and the teaching of the Romani language. Since the end of 2012 as part of the Strategy the University has provided commissioned training courses for Roma mediators and mother tongue teachers funded by the Swedish National Agency for Education and the National Board of Health and Welfare.9 In 2013 Södertörn University was also assigned by the Swedish government to prepare for offering subject teacher education in Romani chib. Another milestone in the history of University, took place in 2014 when the Roma silver smith and human rights activist Rosa Taikon was awarded with an honorary doctorate for her longstanding work as an artist and as a campaigner for Roma Civil Rights, and for being an advocate of higher education. To increase its efforts in building a multidisciplinary and international research milieu in Romani Studies, on 1 January 2017 Södertörn University established the first professorship in Romani Studies in the Nordic countries.

The Södertörn Model The previously mentioned commissioned training courses for Roma mediators and mother tongue teachers were developed right from the start in tandem with Roma, as well as discussing whether to provide a course with only a certificate of participation or to develop the courses to meet the demands needed to acquire university credits,10 if all requirements were met by the participants. It was decided that the courses should meet the standards of acquirements of university credits. The intention with this was also to establish a bridge between the Roma and higher education. The curricula stipulated and the desired learning outcomes from the courses were developed in accordance with the general regulations for all university courses. Several considerations were taken during planning of content, for example, the heterogeneity among the different Roma groups. It is also

8

See www.sh.se Commissioned courses are directed to students who do not compete with other candidates and do not have to follow the general qualifications for higher education. The students are sent to the courses on behalf of an authority, in this case the municipalities. All regulations, curricula and requirements concerning the courses to be able to obtain university credits are equal to any other course at the same level within higher education. For students participating, but not taking the credits, only a certificate of participation is provided. 10 Equivalent to European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System. 9

174    Christina Rodell Olgaç worth noting that the socioeconomic situation is different from the conditions in the countries targeted by the European Training Program for Roma Mediators (ROMED), which the Council of Europe started in 2011 (cf. Rus, Raykova, & Leucht, 2015). The mediator programme is offered over the course of four terms with 7.5 credits each term, a total of 30 credits. The University is currently offering this programme for the fourth time since its start in the end of 2012. Although there was no discussion to label the mediator programme as affirmative action during the planning, consideration was taken to the fact that most of the mediators would have no previous experience of higher education. The participants, all Roma and selected by their municipalities, are provided with additional lectures, sessions and support by both Roma and non-Roma teachers in order to provide for optimal conditions for participants to succeed in their studies. The mediators have full-time employment in their municipalities during the course, with 50% of their employment designed for their studies. The participants come to campus for two and a half days every month, five times per term. In between the sessions on campus they should read and reflect on the literature and prepare assignments at home. The University provides the literature needed through funding from the National Agency for Education and the National Board of Health and Welfare. A partial funding from the government is directed to the municipalities covering some of the expenses for the mediators such as wages and travel costs and hotel, etc. when coming to campus. The remaining costs are provided by the municipalities. For those participants not achieving the demands to obtain the credits, a certificate of participation in each of the four courses completed is provided. The following two-year courses for Roma participants have been offered so far: one mediator course targeting school, 2012–2015 (two groups), one targeting social work and health care, 2014–2016, and currently two courses targeting both school and social work, 2016–2019 (two groups). The regulations to be employed as a mother tongue teacher in Sweden still dictate that the head of the schools decide who is a suitable (lämplig) mother tongue teacher. This means that many mother tongue teachers in the country do not have formal teacher training. In 2015 the University commissioned by the National Agency for Education started a course for Romani mother tongue teachers without formal teacher degrees with the aim to increase their competence in the Romani language as well as in education. This course was running for five terms and is comprised of 37.5 credits. The model of organising the course was similar to the mediator course, except for the content and no extra time for their studies included in their work schedule in the municipalities, except for the time spent on campus. The 25 participants speaking different varieties of Romani came from all over Sweden. They taught pupils from different varieties, but mainly from their own. One fundamental principle of the course in relation to the complex situation of the Romani language in the country was to deepen the teachers’ l­ inguistic awareness and research-based knowledge concerning the links and differences between the different varieties, historically as well as today, including influences from mainstream languages and language contacts. Acknowledging all variations among the participants, allowing everyone to speak their own variety, as well as allowing

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    175 for different orthographic solutions, was a vital principle during their studies. The participants expressed in discussions and evaluation forms at the end of each term that this has led to an increased acceptance and understanding about the linguistic complexity of their mother tongue among them. The conditions for mother tongue teaching in their respective municipalities as reported in discussions with the participants illustrate variations among the municipalities, which all have a certain autonomy in Sweden. The general impression however is that mother tongue teaching in Romani is mostly provided after the regular timetable at school, that the teachers themselves have low status, and the headmasters and other teachers still have little understanding about the importance of mother tongue teaching and the extended rights of the recognised national minorities, although there are exceptions of course (cf. SOU, 2017). In summary, more than 50 Roma have participated in the mediator courses and the mother tongue teacher course from 2012 to the spring 2019. Many of the participants have been offered permanent employment in their respective municipalities during, or after completing their studies.

The First Mediator Programme 2012–2015 The overarching aims of the study of the first mediator programme 2012–2015 presented here, was firstly, to explore the two-year course for Romani mediators to be able to describe and analyse what educational processes were taking place during the course, and secondly to identify what challenges the mediators are facing in their work in the schools and in their studies in higher education. Finally, the last aim was to determine what challenges the universities and academy face in meeting previously underrepresented students (Rodell Olgaç & DimiterTaikon, 2016). The theoretical framework draws from Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital as expanded by Winkle-Wagner and Locks (2014) in the concept Academic Capital Formation which ‘pulls together all of the capital theories, human, social, and cultural capital, in order to theoretically explore pathways toward college access for racially underrepresented and low-income students in particular’ (Winkle-Wagner & Locks, 2014, p. 27). Winkle-Wagner and Locks emphasise the role of agency and that gaining access to university could also work to transform the conditions for an entire social group. Methodologically the study was inspired by participatory action research method with its orientation towards community issues and social change (cf. Creswell, 2012). This meant that the course was developed in close collaboration between the two teachers responsible for the course, one Roma and one nonRoma, and the mediators. Interviews with the mediators, informal discussions during their time on campus, written assignments, evaluation forms at the end of each course and an additional two documentary films concerning the course form the base for the analysis. A summary of the main content of the courses will be presented below followed by some of the findings and implications of the study. The two fundamental fields united into the content of the programme were firstly drawn from Romani Studies covering the historical and contemporary situation of Roma, and secondly from the main principles from courses in education

176    Christina Rodell Olgaç included in a regular teacher education programme. Intercultural approaches and perspectives were also essential to discovering how different topics were treated. The two-year course was divided into the four independent modules. To facilitate the introduction into higher education, the first module started with a familiar field to the participants, namely intercultural perspectives on the history and contemporary situation of Roma and addressed the heterogeneity among the participants. The aim was to deepen the participants knowledge on variations among the Roma both historically and in present time. Different researchers and Romani experts were invited to lecture to the group on various themes as, for example, the history of Roma in Sweden and their school situation in an historical and contemporary perspective. This was also especially important to participants not born in Sweden, and thus often not familiar with the history of the minority in a Swedish context. Introduced into this module was also media literacy, critical media analysis and information and communication technology. Based on the knowledge acquired through the course, each participant had to present a wellstructured PowerPoint presentation on a Romani related theme with information supported by sources and references in accordance with academic standards for their final assignment. The intention of this assignment was also to meet the demands in the municipalities where the mediators often were asked to explain or give presentations concerning the Romani history, languages and traditions, etc. to teachers, pupils or different municipality authorities. The second module with a focus on the history of the Swedish school system provided an overview on the current Swedish school system with the aim to expand the mediators’ experience and knowledge of central concepts and routines in the educational system as, for example, steering documents, curricula and systems of assessment. This would facilitate dialogue and cooperation between the mediators and teachers and other staff on more equal terms, as well as their capacity to explain the school system to the Roma families, thus strengthening the trust and relations between the families and the schools. In addition, an orientation concerning special education, especially PTSD and secondary traumatisation, was included in the content of the course. Finally, their own complex role as mediators was also discussed from an intercultural perspective and reflected upon in oral and written assignments throughout this module. The third module concerned language socialisation and learning from a minority viewpoint. As previously mentioned, the curriculum for the compulsory school system stipulates that the school is responsible for ensuring that all pupils completing compulsory school have knowledge about all five national minorities. The point of departure of this course was therefore the history, language, culture and religion of the other four recognised national minorities in Sweden. Here one important aspect was also to deepen the understanding among the participants concerning parallels and differences between the experiences of the recognised national minorities in the country. Divided into four groups, each of them was assigned to research the situation of one of the four other minorities including the history, cultures, religions and languages, as well as interviewing somebody from the minority concerning their childhood, time at school, view on mother tongue and other languages. The final presentations to the whole group covered

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    177 a general overview of the assigned minority with a special focus on the minority language and school situation. In addition, the participants had to reflect in a written assignment on their own language socialisation and literacy during their early childhood and on their encounter with the formal school system. While participating in the programme, some of the mediators had already been asked to step in as mother tongue teachers in Romani in their municipalities. Wishes had therefore been expressed in discussions and evaluation forms for more lesson planning and teaching and learning strategies, including basic literacy and mathematics to be included in this final module. The fourth term further involved different assignments related to general education, for example, individual presentations to the whole group of a key pedagogue, for example, Socrates, Vygotsky, Dewey or Freire, including their central thoughts and ideas which have influenced teachers and educational systems through history. This last module also included a study visit to Budapest, Hungary with meetings at the Roma Education Fund and the Central European University as well as visits to schools. Some of the findings from this first group of mediators show that in their role and work they meet many challenges in building a bridge between the school, the pupils and their families. Initially the municipalities were generally not well prepared to meet mediators and many of the mediators often had to find out the needs of their local schools and the municipalities on their own. The expectations from parents and school staff were highlighted in many of the discussions and texts by the participants, and they were often expected to solve all problems concerning Roma, even on structural levels. Heavy workloads often took time from the time designed for studying. The results from this first mediator course indicate that the participants, many of them long-time Roma activists, gained theoretical explanations and analytical tools for their previous practical experiences and knowledge, thus strengthening their positions in their municipalities. Their activities in the municipalities and in the schools contributed to the dissemination of more knowledge about the history and contemporary situation of Roma in their municipalities. This was also confirmed by two external evaluation reports (Edström, 2015; Statskontoret, 2016).11 The increased knowledge about the Roma minority in schools and the municipalities resulted in more dialogue and cooperation between the teachers and the families, often through the mediators, and a gradual decrease of absenteeism among the pupils. Their work and impact stretched much beyond the 30 credits achieved through their two-year studies, indicating that their training has provided valuable symbolic capital (cf. Bourdieu, 1991; Winkle-Wagner & Locks, 2014). The mediators were met with more respect when presenting their academic achievements, that is, confirmed course credits, to their headmasters and other persons responsible in the municipalities. Many of them became role models and ‘outspoken public advocates’ (Garaz, 2014, p. 308) for Roma locally, and in some cases also nationally. In addition, most of the participants got permanent employment in their municipality

11

The evaluation report from The Swedish Agency for Public Management, Statskontoret, concerned the two first mediator courses.

178    Christina Rodell Olgaç after completing the whole course. Out of the fifteen participants, seven of them enrolled in the course for mother tongue teachers mentioned above and continued their studies. Thus, there is a tendency towards social mobility among them that is also starting to build bridges between the Roma communities and higher education. Another sign of this is that more Roma themselves are becoming interested in higher education or are starting to view this as an opportunity for their children, as they to a larger extent are getting into contact with the University to obtain more information. But there are other achievements as well. Occasionally, individual Roma students approached the mediator group acknowledging, often for the first time at the University, their Roma background. The mere presence of Roma on campus may also challenge some of the stereotypes and prejudices of the master narrative about Roma among other students and university staff, thus creating important counter narratives concerning this minority (cf. Vavrus, 2010).

Concluding Remarks Many of the measures that have taken place within the field of education and in relation to the recognised national minorities are a result of the ratifications of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in year 2000, and for Roma especially the Strategy for Roma Inclusion launched in 2012. The recognition of Roma as one minority, including the many different Romani groups, has also contributed to more collaboration between the groups than before. It has also led to more contact and co-operation between all the five recognised national minorities, for example, in several types of reference groups, networks, meetings and cultural events, both locally and nationally. At the same time, many of the achievements are still fragile. Roma with higher education are still often challenged by hegemonic discourses concerning Roma and the predominant assumption that they lack formal education. Limited knowledge about the Roma minority together with discrimination and antiziganism still prevail in the schools and in the society at large. Since the first years of the Strategy, the impression is that a certain impatience among some of the authorities is growing, concerning the speed of the implementation of the Strategy, sometimes resulting in leaving Roma out of the process. This means that the dialogue and collaboration between Roma and non-Roma that the Strategy emphasises has in some cases been reduced into mere information from the authorities to Roma rather than working in tandem with them. This has, for example, led to members of the reference group of Roma in the City of Stockholm stepping down in June 2017. The reason for this was their frustration of having limited insights and influence in the work of the City of Stockholm in Roma related issues (Björklund, 2017). In addition, in 2015 nearly 163,000 refugees arrived in Sweden, many of them boys or young men without any family or relatives (Migrationsverket, 2016). This has led to a focus shift in the political debate concerning resources and socioeconomic needs to the new arrivals, with a diminished interest in the situation of Roma and the other national minorities. Although the Education Act states that all pupils in Sweden are entitled to equity in education irrespective of where the pupil lives or their social and

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    179 financial circumstances at home, their education is to be of a high quality (SOU, 2017, p. 37), there is still a lot of challenges to put these policies in practice before all Roma, regardless of age, can fully enjoy lifelong learning in the sense of ‘learning for personal development’ and of a ‘broader discovery and the releasing and harnessing of creative potential’ in all levels of education, formal and informal (UNESCO, 2014, p. 34). In this process the schools, the teachers and the whole educational system have a vital role to play. Roma are part of the history of Sweden. The acknowledgement of the historical diversity in the country in the educational system and in the society at large is of fundamental importance. In addition, this acknowledgement can also promote not only the inclusion of Roma and the other four recognised historical national minorities but also the new large groups of refugees who have recently arrived in the country.

References Alexiadou, N., & Norberg, A. (2017). Sweden’s Double Decade for Roma Inclusion: An examination of education policy in context. European Education, 49, 36–55. DOI: 10.1080/10564934.2017.1280342. Bijvoet, E., & Fraurud, K. (2007). Det romska språket och romsk språkvård i Sverige 2007. Språkrådet vid Institutet för språk och folkminnen. [The Romani language and Romani language maintenance in Sweden 2007.] Retrieved from http://www.sprakochfolkminnen.se/download/18.4aec91b214565240e191055/1529494296996/Det%20 romska%20spr%C3%A5ket%20och%20romsk%20spr%C3%A5kv%C3%A5rd%20 i%20Sverige%202007.pdf. Accessed on October 27, 2017. Björklund, B. O. (2017). Romskt avhopp i Stadshuset. [Roma defection from the City Hall.] É Romani Glinda, 3, 22–23. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Kultur och kritik. [Culture and Critique.] Göteborg: Daidalos. Carling, G., Demetri, M., Dimiter-Taikon, A., Lindell, L., & Schwartz, A. (2016). Romer 500 år i Sverige: Språk, kultur, identitet. [Roma 500 years in Sweden: Language, culture, identity.] Studies in language and culture No. 28. Linköpings Universitet, Linkoping, Sweden. Council of Europe. (2016, June 1). Fourth Report submitted by Sweden pursuant to Article 25 paragraph 2 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. ACFC/SR/IV (2016)004. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson International Edition. Crondahl, K. (2015). Towards Roma empowerment and social inclusion through workintegrated learning. Unit for Health Promotion Research, Series A, No. 9. Faculty of Health Services, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark. Edström, N. (2015). Utvärdering av romska brobyggare inom skolan. [Evaluation of Romani mediators in the school.] Tumba: Mångkulturellt centrum. Retrieved from http:// www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?xurl_= http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext %2Fbilaga%2Fblob%2Fpdf525.pdf%3Fk%3D525. Accessed on November 23, 2015. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI). (2012). ECRI report on Sweden (fourth monitoring cycle). CRI (2012)46. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/Country-bycountry/Sweden/SWE-CbC-IV-2012-046-ENG.pdf. Accessed on April 3, 2017.

180    Christina Rodell Olgaç Folkhälsomyndigheten. (2018). Nulägesbeskrivning 2018 av området hälsa i strategin för romsk inkludering. [A description of the current situation 2018 in the field of health in the strategy for Roma inclusion.] Retrieved from https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten. se/contentassets/e2ba59a8de8844a3ab055bb993ea4175/nulagesbeskrivning-omradethalsa-strategin-romsk-inkludering-18077.pdf. Accessed on 24 July, 2019. Garaz, S. (2014). Helping the marginalised or supporting the elite? Affirmative action as a tool for increasing access to higher education for ethnic Roma. European Educational Research Journal, 13(3), 295–311. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/ eerj.2014.13.3.295. Accessed on August 11, 2016. Government Offices Sweden. (2016). A strategy for Roma inclusion. Factsheet. Ministry of Culture. Stockholm, Sweden. Hartman. S. (2012). Det pedagogiska kulturarvet: Traditioner och idéer i svensk undervisningshistoria. [The pedagogical cultural heritage: Traditions and ideas in Swedish education history.] Andra utgåvan. Stockholm, Sweden: Natur & Kultur. Holmberg, I. M. (Ed.) (2014). Vägskälens kulturarv – Kulturarv vid vägskäl: Om att skapa plats för romer och resande i kulturarvet. En rapport från forskningsprojektet Rörligare kulturarv. [The cultural heritage within cross-roads – The cultural heritage at crossroads: On creating space for Roma and Travellers cultural heritage. A report from the research project on cultural heritage in motion.] Göteborg Stockholm, Sweden: Makadam Förlag. Liedholm, M., & Lindberg, G. (2010). Romska barn i skolor. En undersökning på uppdrag av Delegationen för romska frågor. [Romani children in schools: An investigation on behalf of the delegation of Roma issues.] Retrieved from http://arkiv.minoritet. se/romadelegationen/www.romadelegationen.se/dynamaster/file_archive/100420/ dd56c912ae60316021aa86a4bd208636/romska_barn_i_skolor_v2.pdf. Accessed on 24 July, 2019. Migrationsverket. (2016). Applications for asylum received, 2015. Retrieved from https:// www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.7c00d8e6143101d166d1aab/1485556214938/ Inkomna%20ans%C3%B6kningar%20om%20asyl%202015%20%20Applications%20 for%20asylum%20received%202015.pdf. Accessed on July 24, 2018. Ministry of Culture Sweden. (2015). The dark unknown history: White paper on abuses and violations against Roma in the 20th century. Ds 2014:8. Retrieved from http://www. regeringen.se/49bb8f/contentassets/19c782ee05ab43618073fd45fe83d689/the-darkunknown-history---white-paper-on-abuses-and-rights-violations-against-roma-inthe-20th-century-ds-20148. Accessed on November 2, 2017. Mohtadi, L. (2012). Den dag jag blir fri: En bok om Katarina Taikon. [The day I will be free: A book on Katarina Taikon.] Stockholm, Sweden: Natur & Kultur. National Agency for Education. (2011). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the recreation centre 2011. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/sitevision/ proxy/publikationer/svid12_5dfee44715d35a5cdfa2899/55935574/wtpub/ws/skolbok/ wpubext/trycksak/Blob/pdf2687.pdf ?k=2687. Accessed on July 25, 2018. Ohlsson Al Fakir, I. (2015). Nya rum for socialt medborgarskap: Om vetenskap och politik i “Zigenarundersökningen” – En socialmedicinsk studie av svenska romer 1962–1965. [New spaces of social citizenship. On science and policy in the ‘Gypsy Study’ – A sociomedical study of Swedish Roma 1962–1965.] Dissertations No. 208/2015. Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden. Pulma, P. (Ed.) (2015). De finska romernas historia från svenska tiden till 2000-talet. [The history of the Finnish Roma from the Swedish time until the 21th century.] Helsingfors, Finland: Svenska litteratursällskapet i Finland och Bokförlaget Atlantis. Regeringens skrivelse. (2011). En samordnad och långsiktig strategi för romsk inkludering 2012–2032 [A co-ordinated and long-term strategy for Roma inclusion 2012–2032] Regeringens skrivelse 2011/12:56. Stockholm, Sweden.

Roma in the Educational System of Sweden    181 Rodell Olgaç, C. (2006). Den romska minoriteten i majoritetssamhällets skola: från hot till möjlighet. [The Roma as a minority in the mainstream schools. From a threat to a hope for the future.] Studies in Educational Sciences 85. Stockholm, Sweden: HLS Förlag. Rodell Olgaç, C. (2011). Lärarstudenter i mötet med den romska minoriteten. [Student teachers encounter with the Romani minority.] In P. Strandbrink, B. Lindqvist, & H. Forsberg (Eds.), Tvära möten: Om utbildningsvetenskap och kritiskt lärande, (pp. 97–114). Södertörn Studies in Education 1. Huddinge, Sweden: Södertörns högskola. Rodell Olgaç, C. (2012). Romskt föreningsarbete bland barn och ungdomar: på väg mot ett organisationskapital. [The Romani associations’ work among children and youth: Towards an organisational capital.] In K. Goldstein-Kyaga, M. Borgström, & T. Hübinette (Eds.), Den interkulturella blicken i pedagogik: Inte bara goda föresatser (pp. 135–154). Södertörn Studies in Education 2. Huddinge, Sweden: Södertörns högskola. Rodell Olgaç, C. (2013). Education of Roma in Sweden: An interplay between policy and practice. In S. Hornberg & C. Brüggemann (Eds.), Die Bildungssituation von Roma in Europa (pp. 197–213). Münster, Germany: Waxmann. Rodell Olgaç, C. (2015). National minorities, national self-awareness and intercultural learning processes among student teachers in Sweden. Revista de Educación, 8, 291–306. Retrieved from http://fh.mdp.edu.ar/revistas/index.php/r_educ/article/ view/1352/1369. Accessed on May 26, 2017. Rodell Olgaç, C., Demetri, M., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2010). Nya perspektiv på den romska minoritetens skolgång. [New perspectives on the schooling of the Romani minority.] In P. Lahdenperä & H. Lorentz (Eds.), Möten i mångfaldens skola: interkulturella arbetsformer och nya pedagogiska utmaningar (pp. 133–155). Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur. Rodell Olgaç, C., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2013). ‘Mamma, ska jag säga att jag är rom?’ En kartläggning av romska barns och elevers skolsituation i fem pilotkommuner för Skolverket. [‘Mummy, shall I tell that I am a Roma?’ Mapping the school situation of Romani children and pupils in five pilot municipalities for the National Agency for Education.] Bilaga i Skolverkets Delredovisning av regeringsuppdrag inom regeringens strategi för romsk inkludering till Länsstyrelsen, Dnr A2012/1387/DISK. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/omskolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5. skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fw p ubext%2Ftrycksak%2FBlob%2F pdf3015.pdf%3Fk%3D3015. Accessed on May 2, 2013. Rodell Olgaç, C., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2016). Romsk brobyggarutbildning med inriktning mot skolan 2012–2015: Högre utbildning, social mobilitet och interkulturellt kapital. [Romani mediator course targeting school 2012–2015: Higher education, social mobility and intercultural capital.] Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/sitevision/ proxy/publikationer/svid12_5dfee44715d35a5cdfa2899/55935574/wtpub/ws/skolbok/ wpubext/bilaga/Blob/pdf524.pdf ?k=524. Accessed on July 24, 2018. Rus, C., Raykova, A., & Leucht, C. (2015). Trainer’s handbook. ROMED programme: European training programme for Roma mediators. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe. Retrieved from www.coe-romed.org Selling, J. (2013). Svensk antiziganism: Fördomens kontinuitet och förändringens förutsättningar. [Swedish antiziganism: The continuity of prejudice and the preconditions for change.] Limhamn, Sweden: Sekel Bokförlag. Sjögren, D. (2010). Den säkra zonen: Motiv, åtgärdsförslag och verksamhet i den särskiljande utbildningspolitiken för inhemska minoriteter 1913–1962. [The safety zone: Motives, suggested measures and activities in the separative education policy targeted at native minorities [in Sweden] 1913–1962.] Umea, Sweden: Institutionen för idé-och samhällsstudier, Umeå universitet. Skolinspektionen. (2016). Beslut för förskoleklass och grundskola efter tillsyn i Hammarbyskolan belägen i Stockholms kommun. [The decision for the pre-school class

182    Christina Rodell Olgaç and the compulsory school after the inspection in Hammarbyskolan situated in the municipality of Stockholm.] Dnr 45-2015:10051. Retrieved from http://siris.skolverket.se/siris/ris.openfile?docID=555303. Accessed on August 25, 2016. Söderman, E., & Ström, B. (2008). Romers situation i Malmö. [The situation of the Roma in Malmö]. Avdelningen för integration och arbetsmarknad. Malmö, Sweden: Malmö Stadskontor. SOU. (1997). Steg mot en minoritetspolitik: Europarådets konvention om historiska minoritetsspråk. [Steps towards a minority policy: European charter for historical minority languages]. Swedish Government Official Reports (SOU), SOU 1997:192. Betänkande av minoritetsspråkskommittén, Jordbruksdepartementet. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes. SOU. (2010). Romers rätt: En strategi för romer i Sverige. [Roma rights: A strategy for Roma in Sweden]. Swedish Government Official Reports (SOU), SOU 2010:55. Statens offentliga utredningar. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes. SOU. (2016). Kraftsamling mot antiziganism [A concerted effort against antiziganism]. Swedish Government Official Reports (SOU), SOU 2016:44. Kommissionen mot antiziganism. Stockholm, Sweden: Wolters Kluwer. SOU. (2017). Nationella minoritetsspråk i skolan: Förbättrade förutsättningar för undervisning och revitalisering. [National minority languages at school: Improved preconditions for education and revialisation.]. Swedish Government Official Reports (SOU), SOU 2017:91. Stockholm, Sweden: Wolters Kluwer. Statistics Sweden. (2017). Folkmängd och befolkningsförändringar 2017. [The population and population changes 2017.] Retrieved from https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistikefter-amne/befolkning/befolkningenssammansattning/befolkningsstatistik/pong/ statistiknyhet/folkmangd-och-befolkningsforandringar-20172/. Accessed on July 27, 2018. Statskontoret. (2016). Utvärdering av brobyggarsatsningen inom strategin för romsk inkludering [Evaluation of bridge-buildning initiative for mediators within the strategy for Roma inclusion] (p. 3). Stockholm, Sweden: The Swedish Agency for Public Management. Taikon, K. (1963). Zigenerska. [Gypsy.] Stockholm, Sweden: Wahlström & Widstrand. Taikon, K. (1967). Zigenare är vi. [The Gypsies are us.] Stockholm, Sweden: Tidens Förlag. Takman, J. (1976). The Gypsies of Sweden: A socio-medical study. Stockholm, Sweden: Liber Förlag. UNESCO. (2014). UNESCO Education Strategy 2014–2021. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002312/231288e.pdf. Accessed on November 29, 2017. Vavrus, M. (2010). Critical multiculturalism and higher education: Resistance and possibilities within teacher education. In S. May & C. E. Sleeter (Eds.), Critical multiculturalism: Theory and praxis (pp. 19–31). New York, NY: Routledge. Winkle-Wagner, R., & Locks, A. M. (2014). Diversity and inclusion on campus: Supporting racially and ethnically underrepresented students. London: Routledge.

Conclusion: Participation and Success of European Roma in Education and Lifelong Learning: Common Challenge, Similar Solutions and Hitherto Unsatisfactory Results Andrea Óhidy Abstract In this chapter, the author provides an overview of some central issues of the book. First she shows the similarities in the challenges to increase the participation and success of Roma people in education and lifelong learning in the selected European countries; then she discusses their policies and support programmes, which on the one hand try to improve the social situation of the Roma while promoting minority language and culture on the other hand. The author finds the reason for their similarities regarding the wording, defining and communicating and also concerning the main ideas and concrete projects for possible solutions, in the Roma inclusion policy of the European Union in the frame of the Open Method of Coordination, which has been introduced within the Lisbon Strategy, linked to the idea of lifelong learning. She considers the realisation of these policy measures at national, regional and local levels to have shown only unsatisfactory results until now. Keywords: Overview; Roma inclusion policy; European Union; Open Method of Coordination; policy measures; unsatisfactory results

In this chapter I will provide an overview of some central issues which have been problematised by contributors of this book. As noted in the IntroductionChapter there are many similarities in the challenges to increase the participation and success of Roma people in education and lifelong learning across Europe. The disadvantaged social, economic and geographic situation of the host of the Roma is a common challenge, which is usually seen as the main reason for their low Lifelong Learning and the Roma Minority in Western and Southern Europe, 183–202 Copyright © 2020 by Andrea Óhidy Published under exclusive licence doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-263-820191013

184    Andrea Óhidy educational attainment and success and vice versa: the poor educational results are considered as the main reason for their social deprivations. To change this situation there are similar ideas and solutions, which have been mostly developed at the international (European) level, linked to the idea of lifelong learning. The realisation of these policy measures at national, regional and local levels has been showed only unsatisfactory results until now.

A Common Challenge: To Change the Disadvantaged Situation of the Roma Minority in Europe in Education and Elsewhere The social, economic and geographic situation of the Roma minority is usually, in all Western and Southern European countries discussed in this book, more disadvantaged than the situation of the non-Roma population. Roma people in Europe have a shorter live span, comparatively poor health, lower qualifications, low-payed jobs, smaller and less comfortable housing and they less benefit from social services than non-Roma. They live more often in smaller towns with limited infrastructures, sometimes even wholly segregated. Especially Roma, who belong to the underclass or undercaste1 are usually segregated both: socially and geographically. The minority rights of Roma seem to have the lowest level of implementation in all European countries in comparison with other minority groups (Amnesty International, 2015; ECCR, 2015; Kai & Pejčić, 2010; Lipott, 2012). Although Roma in all European countries discussed in this book are doubly discriminated: as member of an ethnic minority and as member of a social group with particularly weak socioeconomic status (Council of Europe, 2002), there are differences in their legal status as members of a minority group. While in some countries – such as Germany, Norway and Sweden – Roma have special rights as members of a recognised national minority or ethnic group, for example, to disseminate and receive information in their mother tongue or to establish and maintain educational and cultural institutions, in other countries – like Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain – they are not recognised as a national minority group. In the light of the finding’s of Ladányi and Szelényi (2004) we can conclude that in countries, where Roma are not recognised as a national/ethnic minority group, it is more likely that they will suffer as a whole group from social exclusion within an undercaste-formation process. The recognisation as a national/ethnic minority group can help for some of them – for example, with help of minority educational institutions – to reach a better social position, to escape from the underclass-formation process (Ladányi & Szelényi, 2004) and to become a part of the (major) society. Tradition seems to play a very important, although paradoxical role in the life of European Roma: A traditional, family-centered culture is characteristic for the 1

An underclass-building process means that only a part of the Roma minority is excluded, while an undercaste-building process means that the whole Roma minority is excluded (Ladányi & Szelényi, 2004).

Conclusion    185 Roma minority in the host of the countries discussed in this book. However, there is also to see an increasingly adaptation of the – often described as ‘progressive’ and ‘modern’ – norms and values of the European major societies. For example, the traditional Romani languages are used less frequently by the young Roma generations, which are usually bilingual or trilingual. The forced prohibition to use their mother tongue when assimilation was promoted, is one of the reasons for this trend. Compulsory education, and the use of ‘new’ media play another important role in the loss of Romani languages. At the same time there is an increasing cultivation of these languages in books, poems, films and songs, in dictionaries and language courses across Europe. Because the proportion of the European Roma minority develops dynamically; there are fears and anxieties of non-Roma that their national culture could be changed trough the Roma culture. The changes of the traditionally Roma culture due to the influence of the European majority cultures is usually not mentioned in these discourses. The demographic changes regarding the European Roma and non-Roma population and these fears linked to them often promote xenophobia, antiziganism and racial discrimination (not only) in education. Roma attainment and achievement are usually very low in all education systems in Europe, significantly lower than of the non-Roma population. There are still high rates of illiteracy among Roma (see especially the country studies about Norway, Portugal and Spain in this book) and also absenteeism and dropout. Laura Surdu and Furugh Switzer stated: From the body of policy research addressing Roma education, it could be seen as a conclusion that Roma are bounded into an essentialism with two mutually supportive and reinforcing strands: that Roma do not like school and schools do not like the Roma. (Surdu & Switzer, 2015, p. 25) The gap between Roma and non-Roma begins already in preschool education, which is usually mandatory for one year in the Western and Southern European countries discussed in this book: only very few Roma children benefit from it. According to Panagiota Gkofa during the school year 2011-2012 around 8.7% of the Roma students in primary education had attended preschool education (nursery school/Nipiagogio/Νηπιαγωγείο) in Greece (see page 53 in this book). The low level of attendance in preschool education among Roma is considered to be a problem because it is regarded as an important prerequisite for a successful school career, especially in the case of disadvantaged children (Havas and Liskó, 2006; Szoboszlai, 2006). The reasons for the absence of Roma children in preschool education are diverse: Very often Roma children stay at home because their mothers are housewives. In some countries, for example in Germany, there is a shortage of kindergarten-places. But there are positive developments: for example in Spain between 1994 and 2010, about 87% of Roma children attended preschool education (Fundación Secretariado Gitano, 2010, see page 146 in this book). Primary education – which is compulsory in Europe – is usually the sector where the most Roma children participate. Kari Hagatun reports on the situation

186    Andrea Óhidy of the Norwegian capital that, according to a survey of the Municipality of Oslo about absenteeism among 70 Romani speaking pupils in the period 2009/2010, these pupils were absent from school eight times more than the average pupil in the municipality. These numbers are equivalent to being absent from school every third day (Tyldum & Friberg, 2014). A second survey about the period 2012/2013 found similar results showing that the Roma children on average were absent from school 54 out of 190 days (Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, 2013, see page 102 in this book). According to the latest ‘National Study on Roma Communities’ about 14.7% of Roma children do not attend school or abandoned it before the end of compulsory schooling in Portugal (Mendes, Magano, & Candeias, 2014, see page 118 in this book). Valeria Cavioni showed that in Italy (according to Cagol, 1995) about 97% of Roma children do not complete the compulsory education and (according to the recent Governmental report) almost 20,000 of Roma Sinti and Caminanti children, under the age of twelve, mostly migrated from Romania and from former Yugoslavia countries, disregard school’s obligation (Senato della Repubblica, 2011, see page 68 in this book). A possible explanation for the high rates of absenteeism among newly migrated Roma children provides a Swedish study, which has discovered that many families, especially those originated from former Yugoslavia, were still suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder from the war, with a risk of secondary traumatisation in the next generation. No support has been provided to these families and they suffer ongoing distress and anxiety (Rodell Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2013, see page 171 in this book), which can negatively affect the education attainment and achievements of their children. At secondary education level – which is only partly mandatory (usually until the 16th birthday) in the countries discussed in this book – both participation and achievement are significantly lower than in primary education. In Germany the percentage of Sinti and Roma who achieved secondary school graduation increased from 20% to 47% (Hundsalz, 1982, p. 70, see page 33 in this book). In Greece – according to a survey of Panagiota Gkofa from 2016 – for the school year 2011–2012 altogether 2,141 Roma students were registered for secondary education. About 96% of them were attending mandatory lower high schools (Gymnasio/Γυμνάσιο), the rest, 4% (82 Roma students), attended non-compulsory types of secondary schools (see page 54 in this book). The reasons for the low attainment and success can be seek in different factors: for example, in early marriages among Roma from traditionally families or in a strong labour market orientation: Many Roma students prefer shorter training periods so that they can work as early as possible and provide financial support to their families (Havas, Kemény, & Liskó, 2002, p. 172). The number of Roma who attend tertiary education has long been too minimal and there is still very little material about them. In Greece there is no available data concerning the attendance of Roma at institutions of higher education (Mavrommatis, 2008, see page 54 in this book). In Norway – according to Kari Hagatun – there is no data about the attainment of Roma in higher education that can be validated by official statistics and in her own research (Hagatun, 2016, 2017) she either could not find any descriptions of individuals from the

Conclusion    187 Roma community in Norway who have ever gained degrees from, or are currently enrolled in, Norwegian University colleges or Universities (see page 103 in this book). In Sweden Christina Rodell Olgaç has found in her own research (Rodell Olgaç & Dimiter-Taikon, 2013) only very few school teachers who mentioned “one or two” young Roma who participate in higher education (see page 171 in this book). In Germany – according to Natascha Hofmann – current research (Jonuz, 2009; Scherr & Sachs, 2017) confirmed that there are Sinti and Roma enrolled in higher education (see page 34 in this book). But even though there are signs that the number of Roma in higher education is increasing, the numbers are still at a very low level: According to the authors of this book in Italy only 0.5% of a sample of the Roma population have access to the highest level of education (Tarnovschi 2012, see page 78 in this book), in Portugal 0.5% completed high school level or higher (Candeias, 2016, see page 129 in this book). In Spain circa 1% of Roma have a university degree (Damonti & Arza, 2014), which means that – according to a study conducted by Fundación Secretariado Gitano (2013) – for every three Roma people who have earned a university degree, 276 non-Roma individuals have earned one (see page 147 in this book). The participation of Roma in adult education is usually also limited. Negative experiences in mandatory schools have a negative effect on learning motivation and participation in adult education. In Norway there are also only few indications that Roma adults attend adult education courses. Recent research indicates that some of them have taken courses from secondary school and participated in vocational training during imprisonment (Hagatun, 2016, 2017, see page 104 in this book). There are so-called second chance programmes, which should enable the access to education for people who have been leaving school without any qualification. In many European countries discussed in this book there also are independent adult education colleges outside the school system, for example, the Volkshochschulen in Germany or the folhögskolor in Sweden. According to Christina Rodell Olgaç they offer a wide range of courses about specific areas of interest such as music, art, the environment, international issues or targeting a certain profession such as youth recreation leader, treatment assistant, sign language interpreter, or certain groups such as people with various disabilities and immigrants (see page 169 in this book). The Swedish government recommends this independent adult education and vocational training system for all young (not only) Roma people who are unemployed or prefer a vocational training to academic courses (Alexiadou & Norberg, 2017, p. 51, see page 166 in this book). In many countries institutions of adult education offer vocational training and courses specially for Roma. The first Special Centres for Adult Education (Ειδικά Κέντρα Λαϊκής Επιμόρϕωσης) in Greece were founded in 1983 and it provided the first programme which targeted the Roma minority (see page 52 in this book). In Sweden there are some folk high schools, which offer courses for compulsory levels and upper secondary levels as well vocational training directed specifically at Roma. According to Rodell Olgaç these vocational training courses often do not lead to employment (SOU, 2010, p. 55, see page 169 in this book).

188    Andrea Óhidy The European Commission’s report Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States 2016 summarised which issues are still current in European education systems: More attention must be paid to offering second chance education and adult learning, facilitating the transition between education levels, including tertiary education. Pursuing active desegregation measures to provide good quality education to Roma children in a mainstream setting should be a priority. Training programmes should correspond to real labor market needs to effectively improve employment prospects. (European Commission, 2016, p. 10)

Similar Solutions: European Policy Strategies and Measures for Roma Inclusion Policies and support programmes in the European countries discussed in this book have very similar goals and try to fulfil them with similar measures: On the one hand they try to improve the social situation of the Roma while promoting minority language and culture on the other hand. Because of the ‘Europeanization of the Roma issue’ (Ram, 2015, p. 477) there are a host of similarities not only regarding the wording, defining and communication but also concerning the main ideas and concrete projects for possible solutions. These were mostly developed in the frame of the European Union, which put education and lifelong learning in focus of its policies from the 1990s to achieve political and economic goals like economic grown and social cohesion (Óhidy, 2008, 2009). Education and lifelong learning also have become the main strategy for improving the situation of the European Roma minority. The main instrument to develop common European policy strategies and measures since 2000 is the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), which has been introduced within the Lisbon Strategy. In order to achieve the Lisbon agenda – to make the European Union to ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledgebased economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion’ (Lisbon European Council, 2000) – the coordinating role of the European Union should have been strengthened in all areas that could influence the development of a ‘knowledge society’ in Europe. However, as the member states expressed a concern that their national sovereignty might be negatively affected, the OMC was developed as a consensus between national and supranational interests and actors. The OMC process can be defined as a ‘non-primary coordination instrument’, which is ‘coupled with a strong European coordinating function, designed to ensure coherent strategic direction and effective monitoring of the progress’ (Odendahl, 2011, S. 374). The OMC is therefore a purely political instrument which does not aim at a legislative procedure. Its declared goal is ‘cooperation instead of harmonisation’ and the

Conclusion    189 educational policy area was the first area in which this new procedure was established. The principle of openness means the following: ⦁⦁ The competences and national educational practices of the member states

should be respected. The member states should symbolically commit themselves to the common goals of the European Union. By comparing with the other member states, they should become aware of their own strengths and weaknesses and learn from the best-practice examples of others. ⦁⦁ The coordination should not only be carried out by state bodies, but also by other social partners. ⦁⦁ The individual steps should be visible and comprehensible for all actors involved. ⦁⦁ The OMC should pave the way for further integration in Europe (Halász, 2003, p. 511). In the focus of the OMC is a benchmarking process, within which the member states should compare their progress with each other (peer review) on the basis of the common benchmarks in annual implementation reports (monitoring) and learn from the experiences (best-practice) from other member states. To achieve this, the OMC process builds on four elements that reinforce each other: (1) formulation of common political guidelines at the highest political level (by a decision of the European Council); (2) commitment of the member states to develop a concrete national action plan based on these common guidelines; (3) joint evaluation of national action plans at the European level; and (4) development of concrete indicators and benchmarks to control the national implementations (Halász, 2006). Ingo Linsenmann calls this form of cooperation within the OMC ‘silent revolution’, in order to make it clear that the emphasis on similarities rather than differences in educational policy is quite a ‘paradigm shift’ that has moved far away from the member state reservations manifested in the Maastricht Treaty. (Linsenmann, 2001, p. 142) Through its OMC process, which is implemented further in the Programme EUROPE 2020 (European Commission, 2010), and following the programme of the Lisbon Agenda, the European Union tries not only to establish a common strategy for Roma inclusion in all member states, but also to coordinate, to fund and to monitor their achievements. As Natascha Hofmann describes in this book the activities of the European Union, which ‘can be labelled as a turning point in intergovernmental Roma policy’ (see page 17 in this book), because its top downapproaches – together with the impact of the bottom-up movements of Roma organisations and other historical changes in European politics such as shifting borders and implementation of human rights (Law & Kovats, 2018) – has changed awareness and discourses about the European Roma minority significantly. The Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015) was the first Europe-wide policy measure to improve the (educational) situation of Roma involving European

190    Andrea Óhidy organisations, national governments and organisations and the Roma civil society as well. From the Western and Southern European countries discussed in this book one country took part in the Decade of Roma Inclusion2: Spain, and Norway had an observer status. 2005 the Roma Education Fund – a non-­governmental organisation financed by the World Bank and the Open Society Institute – was founded to help to increase attainment and achievement of Roma in education. Through the 2000/43/EC the European Union obligated its member states to give Roma (like other EU citizens) non-discriminatory access to education, employment, vocational training, healthcare, social protection and housing (see European Commission, 2011b, p. 3) and made several other proposals as well. In its Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies the European Commission described four sectors (education, employment, housing and health) in which the social participation of Roma should be improved while combating poverty and discrimination against them and asked the member states ‘to adopt or to develop further a comprehensive approach to Roma integration and endorse the[se] […] goals’ (European Commission, 2011b). The Commission emphasised on the one hand that: ‘Member states have the primary responsibility for Roma integration, because the key areas which are the biggest challenge for Roma inclusion remain mostly national responsibilities’ (European Commission, 2011a, p. 1). On the other hand, it adopted a ‘robust monitoring mechanism to ensure concrete results for Roma’ (European Commission, 2011b, p. 4). According to the goals of the European Union’s Roma Integration Strategy there are a variety of policy measures, initiatives, programmes and projects in the member states. In the host of European countries Roma integration policy was focussed on either increasing the social disadvantaged situation of Roma or on their recognition as a cultural minority (Forray, 2010). In Norway for example, according to Kari Hagatun the policy measures have historically alternated between attempts of forced assimilation, special measures targeted to maintain Roma culture while improving their economical-social situation, and equal treatment-policy (Engebrigtsen & Lidén, 2010). Hagatun reports a shift in Norwegian Roma policy in the 1990s, where special measures for Roma were abolished to treat Roma as ordinary citizens. Therefore, welfare policy in Norway nowadays is no longer based on group rights, but on individual rights (AID, 2009; Brochmann & Kjeldstadli, 2008) and culture and ethnicity are regarded as private qualities and not a matter for public education (Engebrigtsen, 2015, p. 120, see page 106 in this book). The impacts of the European Roma policies are well visible in Spain. According to Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert-Simó, the first law directly focussed on the recognition of the Roma situation and on the implementation of special measures to improve conditions for them was established due to the EU-funded WORKALÓ project

2

Twelve countries – Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain – took part in the Decade of Roma Inclusion, while Slovenia, the United States, Norway and Moldova participated with an observer status.

Conclusion    191 (Aiello, Mondejar, & Pulido, 2013). Spain also took part in the Decade of Roma Inclusion and the goals of the Spanish Strategy for Roma Inclusion explicitly follow the guidelines developed by the European Commission (see page 148 in this book). In addition to the Spanish national strategy, several regions – for example, Catalonia – have worked out specific political frameworks focussed on the inclusion of Roma people. The current Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia (2017–2020) includes policy measures in 13 areas, inter alia education, employment, housing, health, women, youth and the Roma population. It focusses on so-called Successful Educational Actions, which have already demonstrated a social impact on the educational success of the Roma community, identified by the – also EU-funded – INCLUD-ED project. These actions are concrete educational methods and activities, such as establishing interactive groups or practice dialogic reading, expending learning time through giving more options and spaces for individual learning in schools, offering educational opportunities for the whole family and involving them and other community members in educational decisionmaking processes and using a dialogical model of conflict resolution (Aiello et al., 2013). The project ‘Schools as Learning Communities’ aimed to overcome school failure and coexistence problems through the implementation of these Successful Educational Actions (Díez-Palomar & Flecha, 2010; Ríos, Herrero, & Rodríguez, 2013). According to recent evaluations this project has been very successful: for example, in the ‘Mediterrani’ School in Tarragona absenteeism decreased by more than 30% in just one year between 2014 and 2015 (García, Álvarez, & MacíasAranda, 2016; Macías-Aranda, 2017, see page 154 in this book). In Italy Valeria Cavioni differentiates between European projects and projects supported by municipalities. She reports on four European projects – ‘The education of the Gypsy childhood in Europe’ project, the INSETRom project, the SMILE project and the MATRIX project – which aimed to improve the education situation of Roma students and in which other countries discussed in this book also participated as well: The 2003 founded three years project ‘The education of the Gypsy childhood in Europe’ investigated the education and socialisation processes of Roma children in Spain, France and Italy (Giménez Adelantano, 2002, see page 84 in this book). The project INSETRom (Teachers In-service Training for Roma Inclusion, 2007–2009), funded by the European Commission, had the intention to establish cooperation between schools and Roma families. In addition to Italy, Cyprus, Netherlands, Greece, Austria, Romania, United Kingdom and Slovakia participated in the project. The two-year European LLP project ‘SMILE – Supporting Motivation to Intervene on Learning and Experience’ project, which was piloted in Italy targeted the promotion of social inclusion of Roma with a comprehensive approach to support Roma students, establishing an educational community base on prosocial behaviours. Between 2013 and 2015 the project was implemented in Italy, Bulgaria, Belgium, Croatia and United Kingdom (see page 85 in this book). The ‘Roma Matrix Project’ (Mutual Action targeting Racism, Intolerance and Xenophobia) – co-funded by the European Union’s Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme from 2013 to 2015 with participants from 10 European countries, for example, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and the United Kingdom – aimed to develop actions

192    Andrea Óhidy at local, national and European levels to tackle discrimination against Roma and promote inclusion (Migration Yorkshire, 2015, 2016, see page 85 in this book). In Portugal – according to Pedro Calado, Liliana Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos – since 2015 Roma students can apply for a scholarship in higher education as a part of the Operational Programme for the Promotion of Education and there is also set of training measures, tutoring and accompanying fellows and their families. Within the Dream Teens project young Roma and non-Roma should be involved in social positive engagements and become more active and participative in their life contexts and society (Frasquilho et al., 2016; Gaspar de Matos, 2015; Gaspar de Matos & Simões, 2016, see page 134 in this book). A resilience curriculum for early years and elementary schools was developed among six partner countries: Malta, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Sweden within the EU-funded RESCUR project (Cefai, Miljević-Riđički et al., 2015, see page 133 in this book). In Sweden – in context of the 2017 first established professorship for Romani studies at the Södertörn University – there were also training courses for Roma mediators and mother tongue teachers, which were developed right from the start in tandem with Roma. According to Christina Rodell Olgaç this project can be seen as successful, because there is a tendency of social mobility among the graduates, who usually got permanent employments after finishing their studies. Many of them became role models for other Roma and started to build bridges between the Roma communities and (higher) education (see page 178 in this book). Despite of these manyfold efforts on the European, national and regional/local levels the results are still limited and sometimes also contradictory. Panagiota Gkofa states – quoting the European Commission’s report ‘Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States 2016’ (European Commission, 2016) – about the Greek case, that it ‘seems to be one of the member states which need to make further efforts to achieve Roma inclusion’ see page 55 in this book). This analyse can be seen as valid not only for Greece but for most of the European countries.

Hitherto Unsatisfactory Results: Continuing Segregation of Roma in Education According to the theory of Helmut Fend about the school system, educational institutions play a central role in supporting or impeding social mobility (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1974; Fend, 1980, 2006). Based on empirical data about attainment and success of Roma in education and lifelong learning – clearly shown in the country studies in this book – we can state that the current national school systems in Europe rather reinforce their deprivation. School is an institution that translate socio-economic differences into distinct educational outcomes. In the case of Roma children, schools perform a negative selection, often by tracking Roma into segregated classes and schools and directing many of them into special education. (Surdu & Switzer, 2015, p. 24)

Conclusion    193 The European Roma Rights Centre has listed the segregation forms Roma children suffered from in education: ⦁⦁ Segregation in schools or classes for the mentally handicapped. ⦁⦁ Segregation in substandard schools or classes in the mainstream educational

system.

⦁⦁ School segregation resulting from residental segregation ‘Gypsy ghetto

schools’.

⦁⦁ Exclusion from the school system. ⦁⦁ Abuse in schools, including racially motivated physical abuse (ERRC, n.d., p. 2).

Helen O’Nions emphasised that ‘Educational authorities do not necessarily act with discriminatory intent’, sometimes they just try to refer to the wishes of the Roma parents. She seeks the reasons of their wish for separate schooling in their negative education experience, illiteracy levels and concern that school education may challenge aspects of Roma culture and family life. In other cases, there are protests from non-Roma parents against inclusive schooling, which avert desegregation (O’Nions, 2015, p. 7). O’Nions also differentiates between discriminatory and benevolent segregation. While discriminatory segregation is based on ethnic stereotypes, benevolent segregation tries to better address the needs of Roma pupils through separative schooling (O’Nions, 2015). The most serious form of segregation in the education system is that Roma children are sent to schools for the mentally retarded, often not because of any intellectual shortcomings. According to Amnesty International and the European Roma Rights Centre (2017), there is a cultural prejudice among the decision-maker. This can clearly be observed, for example, in the host of here discussed Southern European countries: Pedro Calado, Liliana Moreira, Sónia Costa, Celeste Simões and Margarida Gaspar de Matos stated about the Portuguese situation: ‘A theme which is essential to approach is ethnic discrimination’ (see page 127 in this book). This is characteristic not only for Portugal but for other countries as well. According to Fernando Macías-Aranda, Teresa Sordé-Martí, Jelen Amador-López and Adriana Aubert Simon Roma children in Spain are often segregated into underperforming public schools, known as ‘ghetto schools’ (Santiago & Maya, 2012), which has a highly negative effect on the quality of the education received by Roma students and limits their social opportunities, particularly with regard to employment (CREA, 2010; Vargas & Gómez, 2003, see page 145 in this book). Panagiota Gkofa – quoting Dragonas (2012), Vergidis (1995) and Varnava-Skoura, Vergidis, and Kassimi (2012) – differentiates between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ exclusion of Roma children at Greek schools. She speaks about active exclusion, when Roma’s enrolment is actively refused, and about passive exclusion, when their physical presence in class is tolerated but the Roma students do not participate in the educational process (see page 53 in this book). According to her – although the official policy discourse presents the mainstream school as both desirable and the predominant school for Roma students in Greek education – in practice Roma students still experience various forms of discrimination: in some cases they get educated in separate classes inside the mainstream school, in other cases (especially in areas with a large Roma population) there are a small number of

194    Andrea Óhidy schools, which are only attended by Roma children (see page 53 in this book). Valeria Cavioni reports that in Italy the obstacles and challenges to Roma inclusion are triggered not only by the structure of the educational system and prejudices related to the negative stereotypes of Roma population, but also by resistances and mistrust of the Roma, Sinti and Caminanti population towards the Italian school system (Carr & Klassen, 1997; Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993) which is from their point of view a symbol of a hostile society, that ‘forces cultural assimilation instead of valuing a plurality of ethnic identities’ (Senato della Repubblica, 2011, see page 79 in this book). On the opposite side, the mainstream Italian school system tends to ignore, devalue and reject the Roma, Sinti and Caminanti culture (Jordan, 2001; Trentin, Monaci, De Lumèc, & Zanon, 2006, see page 80 in this book). In the Western European countries discussed in this book there are usually no segregated classes or schools, but there are still problematic issues regarding the schooling of Roma children. Kari Hagatun reports about the persistently high drop-out rates and high levels of absenteeism among Roma pupils in elementary and lower secondary schools in Norway (see page 102 in this book). Christina Rodell Olgaç complains about the closing down of the only bilingual Romani class (Roma Kulturklass) in Sweden, which had been a part of a comprehensive municipal school in Stockholm for almost 20 years. Although it has been considered an example of good practice for several years (Rodell Olgaç, 2013; Rodell Olgaç, Demetri, & Dimiter-Taikon, 2010), it was closed 2016 after publishing a critical report of the Swedish Schools Inspectorate (Skolinspektionen, 2016). Rodell Olgaç sees this closing as a ‘backlash in the bilingual education for Romani children’, because many of them do not have any mother tongue tuition anymore (see page 171 in this book). Natascha Hofmann reports that in Germany – where the number of Roma children in special schools for children with learning difficulties is traditionally disproportionately high – the percentage of Sinti and Roma children who attend special schools for children with learning difficulties has significantly decreased since the 1980s from 31% to 9.4% (Hundsalz, 1982; Strauß, 2011, p. 32). But she warns that many of them are still registered in special schools, not due to learning difficulties but due to prejudice and antiziganistic patterns (see page 33 in this book). According to the country studies in this book we can state that in all here discussed Western and Southern European countries there are a host of policy measures to change this situation of the Roma for the better. Regarding their results we can say that some of these policy measures might be very successful individually, but until now they could not have significantly changed the multiple deprivation of the European Roma minority. As the European Commission in its Framework for Roma Inclusion stated: Inspite of some progress achieved both in the Member States and at EU level over the past years, little has changed in the day-to-day situation of most of the Roma. (European Commission, 2011b, p. 3) In a press release about the first results of the Framework the Commission has recognised ‘first signs of improvement in the lives of Roma’ (European

Conclusion    195 Commission, 2014, p. 1) but warns that ‘challenges remain’ (European Commission, 2014). The Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (NRIS) – which analyses the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies in Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovakia and Spain – also stated that the dearth of political will at all levels of national and subnational government in Member States is hampering the implementation of the objectives laid out in the NRIS and accompanying policy documents. (European Parliament, 2015, p. 9) The document not only blames the lack of political will in the member states, there is also self-criticisms about the ‘insufficient bite’ of the own policy instruments, especially regarding the OMC (European Parliament, 2015, p. 58). The document Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States stated: ‘Education continues to receive the most attention by member states in their integration measures’ (European Commission, 2016, p. 10). However, according to these findings we can generally state with Helen O’Nions that ‘in many states there appears to be a lack of commitment to Roma integration at the local level where such measures need to be implemented’ (O’Nions, 2015, p. 8). Laura Surdu and Furugh Switzer criticised the low objectives – for example, to ensure that Roma children complete at least primary school (European Commission, 2011a) – because ‘Low objectives promote low achievements’ (Surdu & Switzer, 2015, p. 25). O’Nions sees the EU Framework as ‘an important starting point in the eradication of school segregation’ but thinks that ‘Roma inclusion needs to be reconceptualised in the eyes of the majority as a matter of equality’ (O’Nions, 2015, p. 9), because ‘Too often it would seem that Roma inclusion is conceptualized as a peripheral or minority interest’ (O’Nions, 2015). The European Commission sees the hitherto results unsatisfactory as well. In its Midterm review of the EU framework for national Roma integration – although it has confirmed ‘the added value of the EU framework, the relevance of EU Roma integration goals’ (European Commission, 2017, p. 16) – it also stressed the existence of the continued need for a combination of targeted and mainstream approaches, where by targeted measures can help to eliminate barriers to effective equal access for Roma to rights and services in mainstream public policies. (European Commission, 2017) Melanie H. Ram argues that the European Union (among other international organisations) on the one hand provides significant inputs for Roma inclusion, but also serves as centralised distraction that foster extremely high expectations and thus great disappointment with the results (Ram, 2015, p. 465). According to her, the contributions can be seen in collection and dissemination of policy-relevant data about Roma, requiring countries to undertake legislative reforms (e.g. the Racial

196    Andrea Óhidy Equality Directive 2000/43/EC), providing forums for the member states to share information and best practices, monitoring the progress in achieving the stated goals and providing funds for projects. However, she problematises the slow and uneven implementation, the costly bureaucracy, the inefficient use of funds and the limited Roma participation (Ram, 2015). She seeks the reasons for the limited achievements of the European policy measures for Roma inclusion in the limited local and national support and political will in the member states. She concludes: Without local societal support and input, local and national political support will remain limited, and without political will, I[nternational] O[rganizations] efforts will continue to achieve only limited outputs despite their growing inputs. (Ram, 2015, p. 479) A ‘shadow-report’ of the Open Society European Policy Institute – based on a questionnaire among active Roma and pro-Roma civil society organisations in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and the UK, and focussed primarily on the European dimension of the design and implementation of the Roma Framework of the European Union – on the one hand welcomed the Framework, seeing its very existence as ‘an achievement in itself’, which ‘represents a turning point for Roma communities in Europe’ (Open Society European Policy Institute, 2017, p. 5). On the other hand, it criticises design and implementation in the member states. As main weakness of the Framework, the report defines the ‘non-binding character’ of the Framework, the inprecise definition of the target group and the lack of anti-Gypsyism-goals in national strategies and the not-mentioning of Roma arts and culture and history as well. The report recommends to exercising more forcefully pressure on member states and to improve the Roma participation (Open Society European Policy Institute, 2017, p. 5ff). As Amnesty International warned: In countries across Europe […] Roma are too often treated as secondclass citizens. Enduring systematic social exclusion, extremely poor living conditions, racially motivated attacks and forced evictions, Romani children rarely have a fighting chance of progressing in life. They are trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and marginalization. (Amnesty International, 2015, p. 1) The European Roma Rights Centre emphasised that ‘the problem of the systematic denial to Roma of the right to education cannot be overcome without the implementation of comprehensive desegregation programs’ (ERRC, n.d., p. 1) and defined ‘international involvement […] [as] crucial to ensure the real development and implementation in full’ (ERRC, n.d.). As a conclusion of the assessments and critical reviews the European Commission identified two priority goals for the future: To reinforce and distinguish the anti-discrimination and antiGypsyism focus both under the EU Framework and in the national strategies, and to promote Roma participation and especially the empowerment of Roma children, youth and women (European Commission, 2017).

Conclusion    197

Summary To summarise the findings of this book we can say that there is a common challenge to change the disadvantaged situation of the Roma minority in Europe in education and elsewhere. There are a host of policy strategies, measures and projects across Europe, which offer similar solutions on the national, regional and local levels of the countries discussed here. We can seek the main source of these similarities in the common strategy for Roma inclusion developed by the European Union. Despite the great number and diversity of the hitherto activities to increase the attainment and success of the European minority in education and lifelong learning, especially their continued segregation in education is a warning sign that the results are still unsatisfactory until now. The goal of Roma inclusion hasn’t been fulfilled yet and there is still a long way to go to achieve the integration/ inclusion and the social advancement of the whole European Roma minority in education and beyond.

References AID (Norwegian Ministry for Work and Inclusion). (2009). Action plan for improvement of the living conditions of Roma in Oslo. Oslo, Norway: The Ministry. Retrieved from https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/FAD/Vedlegg/SAMI/Nasjmin/ Handlingsplan_ro m_EN.pdf Aiello, E., Mondejar, E., & Pulido, M. Á. (2013). Communicative methodology of research and recognition of the Roma people. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(2), 254–265. doi:10.1525/irqr.2013.6.2.254 Alexiadou, N., & Norberg, A. (2017). Sweden’s double decade for Roma inclusion: An examination of education policy in context. European Education, 49, 36–55. doi:10.1080/10564934.2017.1280342 Amnesty International. (2015, April 8). Segregation, bullying and fear: The stunted education of Romani children in Europe. Amnesty International. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/04/the-stunted-education-of-romanichildren-in-europe Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1974). Die Illusion der Chancengleichheit. Untersuchungen zur Soziologie des Bildungswesens am Beispiel Frankreichs. [The illusion of equal opportunities. Studies on the sociology of education using the example of France.] Stuttgart, Germany: Klett:. Brochmann, G., & Kjeldstadli, K. (2008). A history of immigration. The case of Norway 900–2000. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget. Cagol, M. (1995). Un popolo sconosciuto. Gli Zingari. [Unknown people. The Gypsies.] Retrieved from http://www.gfbv.it:http://www.gfbv.it/3dossier/sinti-rom/it/rom-it. html#r10 Candeias, P. (2016). «No estudar é que está o ganho?» Comparação entre ciganos com diferentes níveis de escolaridade com base em dados do Estudo Nacional sobre as Comunidades Ciganas. [“In studying is the gain?” Comparison between Roma with different levels of schooling based on data from the National Study on Roma communities.] Configurações [Online], 18. Retrieved from http://configuracoes.revues.org/ 3563 Carr, P. R., & Klassen, T. R. (1997). Different perceptions of race and education: Racial minority and White teachers. Canadian Journal of Education, 22, 67–81.

198    Andrea Óhidy Council of Europe. (2002). Recommendation 1557 on the legal situation of Roma in Europe. Parliamentary Assembly. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/16805df937 CREA. (2010). Gitanos: de losmercadillos a la escuela y delinstituto al futuro. Madrid, Spain: Ministerio de Educación. Instituto de Formacióndel Profesorado, Investigación e Innovacióneducativa (IFIIE). Retrieved from http://www.mecd.gob.es/dctm/ ministerio/educacion/ifiie/lineas-investigacioninnovacion/educacion-intercultural/ publicaciones-informes/publicaciones/gitanos-mercadillosescuelasinstitutos?docum entId=0901e72b807b22e8 Damonti, P., & Arza, J. (2014). Exclusión en la comunidad gitana: Una brecha social que persiste y se agrava. [Exclusion in the Roma community: A social gap that persists and worsens.] Madrid, Spain: Fundación Foessa. Retrieved from http://www.foessa2014.es/informe/ uploaded/documentos_trabajo/15102014151523_8331.pdf Díez-Palomar, J., & Flecha, R. (2010). Comunidades de Aprendizaje: Un proyecto de transformación social y educativa. [Schools as learning communities: A social and educational transformation project.] Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación Del Profesorado, 67(24, 1), 19–30. Dragonas, T. (2012). Roma mothers and their young children. Country Report: Greece. Unpublished report. Bernard Van Leer Foundation. Engebrigtsen, A. I. (2015). Educating the Roma: The struggle for cultural autonomy in a Seminomadic Group in Norway. Social Inclusion, 3(5), 115–125. Engebrigtsen, A. I., & Lidén, H. (2010). Å finne sin plass som minoritet: Rombefolkningen i Norge i dag. [Finding their place as a minority: The Roma population in Norway today.] In A. B. Lund & B. B. Moen (Eds.), Nasjonale minoriteter i det flerkulturelle Norge [National minorities in multicultural Norway] (pp. 199–214). Trondheim, Norway: Tapir akademiske forlag. European Commission. (2010). EUROPE 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ. do?uri=COM:2010:2020:FIN:EN:PDF European Commission. (2011a). An EU framework for National Roma integration strategies: Frequently asked questions. Press release. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http:// europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-216_de.htm European Commission. (2011b). An EU framework for National Roma integration strategies up to 2020. COM (2011) 173 final. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from https://eur-lex. europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52011DC0173 European Commission. (2014). Roma integration: EU framework triggers first results. Press release. Brussels. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-371_en.htm European Commission. (2016). Assessing the implementation of the EU framework for National Roma integration strategies and the council recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the member states. Retrieved from https://ec.europa. eu/in-fo/sites/info/files/roma_report_2016_web_ok_en.pdf European Commission. (2017). Midterm review of the EU framework for national Roma integration strategies. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from https://www.euromanet.eu/ news/commission-publishes-mid-term-review-on-progress-made-and-challengesahead-in-implementation-of-eu-framework-for-nris/ European Parliament. (2015). Evaluation of the EU framework for National Roma integration strategies. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2015/536485/IPOL_STU(2015)536485_EN.pdf European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) (2002). Barriers to the Education of Roma in Europe: A position paper by the European Roma Rights Center. Avaible at: http:// www.errc.org/reports-and-submissions/barriers-to-the-education-of-roma-in-europea-position-paper-by-the-european-roma-rights-centerstudents in primary education.] Madrid, Spain: IFIIE/ Instituto de la Mujer. Retrieved from https://www.gitanos.org/ upload/76/26/normalizacion_educativa.pdf

Conclusion    199 Fend, H. (1980). Theorie der schule. [Theory of the school.] München, Germany: Urban & Schwarzenegger Verlag. Fend, H. (2006). Neue Theorie der Schule. Einführung in das Verstehen von Bildungssystemen. [New theory of the school. Introduction to the understanding of education systems.] Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Forray, K. R. (2010). Social equality versus cultural identity: Gypsy/Roma educational policies in selected East-Central European states. Paper for the XIV. World Congress of Comparative Education Societies in Istanbul/Turkey, 14–18 June. Frasquilho, D., Ozer, E. J., Ozer, E. M., Branquinho, C., Camacho, I., Reis, M., & Gaspar de Matos, M. (2016). Adolescents-led participatory project in Portugal in the context of the economic recession. Health Promotion Practice, 1–9. doi:10.1177/ 15 248399166 60679 Frasquilho, D., Ozer, E., Ozer, E., Branquinho, C., Camacho, I., Reis, M., & Matos, M. G. (2016). Adolescents-led participatory project in Portugal in the context of the economic recession. Health Promotion Practice, 1–9. DOI:10.1177/1524839916660679 Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2010). Evaluación de la normalización educativa de las alumnas y los alumnos gitanos en Educación Primaria. [Evaluation of the educational normalization of Roma students in primary education.] Madrid, Spain: IFIIE/ Instituto de la Mujer. Retrieved from https://www.gitanos.org/upload/76/26/normalizacion_ educativa.pdf Fundación Secretariado Gitano. (2013). El alumnado gitano en secundaria. [Roma students in compulsory education.] Madrid, Spain: FSG & Ministerio de Educación Cultura y Deporte. Retrieved from https://gitanos.org/upload/92/20/EstudioSecundaria.pdf García, C., Álvarez, P., & Macías-Aranda, F. (2016). Successful participation of Roma in family education: Findings from the EduRom project. In AERA annual meeting: Public scholars to educate diverse democracies. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC. Gaspar de Matos, M. (Coord.). (2015). Dream teens: Adolescents in safe navigation through unknown waters. Lisboa, Portugal: Coisas de Ler. Gaspar de Matos, M., & Simões, C. (2016). From positive youth development to youth’s engagement: The dream teens. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 8(1), 4–18. Giménez Adelantado, A. (2002). The education of Gypsy childhood in Europe. Retrieved from http://cordis.europa.eu/documents/documentlibrary/82608111EN6.pdf Hagatun, K. (2016, September 16). The educational situation for Roma pupils in Norway: Norwegian Roma parents at a crossroads? Paper presentations at the 2016 annual meeting of Gypsy Lore Society and conference on Romani studies. Södertörn University, Stockholm, Sweden. Hagatun, K. (2017). Challenging the metanarrative of the ‘unable and unwilling’: Norwegian Roma parents’ narratives on prioritizing education. Paper presented at the 2017 Baltic Sea conference on Romani studies, Södertörn University, Stockholm, Sweden. Halász, G. (2003). A nemzeti oktatáspolitikák európai szintű koordinációja. [Coordination of national education policies at European level.] Educatio, 4(2003), 510–533. Halász, G. (2006). Uniós hatások a magyar közoktatásban 2002 és 2006 között [EU-effects in the Hungarian public education between 2002 and 2006.] Educatio, 1, 3–25. Havas, G., Kemény, I., & Liskó, I. (2002). Cigány gyerekek az általános iskolában. [Gypsy children in primary school.] Budapest, Hungary: Oktatáskutató Intézet – Új Mandátum Publisher. Havas, G., & Liskó, I. (2006). Óvodától a szakmáig. Tanulmánykötet. [From kindergarten to profession.] Budapest, hungary: Mandátum Kiadó. Hundsalz, A. (1982). Situation der Sinti in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. [Situation of the Sinti in the Federal Republic of Germany.] Stuttgart, Germany: Kohlhammer Verlag.

200    Andrea Óhidy Jonuz, E. (2009). Stigma Ethnizität. Wie zugewanderte Romafamilien der Ethnisierungsfalle begegnen. [Stigma ethnicity. How immigrant Roma families encounter the ethnicization trap.] Leverkusen-Opladen: Budrich UniPress Ltd. Jordan, E. (2001). Exclusion of travellers in state schools. Educational Research, 42(2), 117–132. Kai, D., & Pejčić, M. (2010). Unity and fragmentation, challenges to Roma self-organization and collective representation in Sweden. Discussion paper on Roma culture. Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. Ladányi, J., & Szelényi, I. (2004). A kirekesztettség változó formái. [Various forms of exclusion.] Budapest, Hungary: Napvilág kiadó. Law, I., & Kovats, M. (2018). Rethinking Roma: Identities, politicisation and new agendas. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Springer. Linsenmann, I. (2001). Bildungspolitik. [Education policy.] In W. Weidenfeld & W. Wessels (Eds.), Jahrbuch der europäischen Integration 2000/2001 (pp. 141–145). Bonn, Germany: EUROPA UNION VERLAG GmbH. Lipott, S. (2012). The Roma as a protected minority? Policies and best practices in the EU. 4, 78–97. Retrieved from http://beta.ier.ro/docmente/rjea_vol12_no4/RJEA_2012_ vol12_no4_art_6.pdf Lisbon European Council. (2000). Presidency conclusions. Lisbon, Portugal. Retrieved from http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/00100-r1. en0.htm Macías-Aranda, F. (2017). Contributions of the Roma people to overcome poverty and antigypsyism through successful educational actions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Barcelona/Spain, Spain. Mavrommatis, G. (2008). Παιδιά Ρομά στο ϵλληνικό δημόσιο σχολϵίο. [Roma children in Greek public school.] In S. Trubeta (Ed.), Οι Ρομά στο σύγχρονο ϵλληνικό κράτος: Συμβιώσϵις – Αναιρέσϵις – Απουσίϵς [The Roma in the modern Greek state: Symbiosis – denegation – absence.] (pp. 199–223). Athens, Greece: Kritiki. Mendes, M., Magano, O., & Candeias, P. (2014). Estudo Nacional sobre as Comunidades Ciganas. [National study on Roma communities.] Lisboa, Portugal: Alto Comissariado para as Migrações. Migration Yorkshire. (2015). Tackling racism, hostility and discrimination: Information for Roma people living in Yorkshire. Roma Matrix. Retrieved from http://www.migrationyorkshire.org.uk/userfiles/file/publications/rm-d23-bklet-hatecrimefeb2015-en. pdf. Accessed on November 5, 2017. Migration Yorkshire. (2016). Roma Matrix. Retrieved from http://www.migrationyorkshire. org.uk/?page=roma-matrix. Accessed on November 11, 2017. Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, NI. (2013). Parallel report from the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights related to the fifth periodic report of Norway. Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo. Odendahl, K. (2011). Die Europäisierung des Bildungswesens durch die offene Methode der Koordinierung. [The Europeanization of education through the open method of coordination.] In K. Odendahl (Ed.), Europäische (Bildungs-)Union? (pp. 373–396). [European (Education)-Union?] Berlin, Germany: Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag. Óhidy, A. (2008). Lifelong learning. Interpretations of an education policy in Europe. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Óhidy, A. (2009). Lebenslanges Lernen und die europäische Bildungspolitik. Adaptation des Lifelong Learning-Konzepts der Europäischen Union in Deutschland und Ungarn. [Lifelong learning and the European education policy. Adaptation of the lifelong learning-concept of the European Union in Germany and Hungary.] Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. O’Nions, H. (2015). Warehouses and window-dressing: A legal perspective on educational segregation in Europe. Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik, 1, 4–10.

Conclusion    201 Open Society European Policy Institute. (2017). Revisiting the EU Roma Framework: Assessing the European dimension for the post-2020 future. Brussels, Belgium. Retrieved from https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/revisitingeu-romaframework-20170607.pdf Ponterotto, J. G., & Pedersen, P. B. (1993). Preventing prejudice: A guide for counselor and educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Ram, M. H. (2015). International policy and Roma education in Europe: Essential inputs or centralized distractions? Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 61(4), 465–483. Retrieved from file:///F:/Literatur/International%20Policy%20and%20 Roma%20Education%20in%20Europe%20%20Essential%20Inputs%20or%20 Centralized%20Distractions%20%20%20%20Ram%20%20%20Alberta%20 Journal%20of%20Educational%20Research.htm Ríos, O., Herrero, C., & Rodríguez, H. (2013). From access to education. The revolutionary transformation of schools as learning communities. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(2), 239–253. doi:10.1525/irqr.2013.6.2.239 Rodell Olgaç, C. (2013). Education of Roma in Sweden: An interplay between policy and practice. In S. Hornberg & C. Brüggemann (Eds.), Die Bildungssituation von Roma in Europa. [The educational situation of Sinti and Roma in Europe] (pp. 197–214). Münster, Germany: Waxmann. Rodell Olgaç, C., Demetri, M., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2010). Nya perspektiv på den romska minoritetens skolgång. [New perspectives on the schooling of the Romani minority.] In I. P. Lahdenperä & H. Lorentz (Eds.), Möten i mångfaldens skola: interkulturella arbetsformer och nya pedagogiska utmaningar. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur. Rodell Olgaç, C., & Dimiter-Taikon, A. (2013). ‘Mamma, ska jag säga att jag är rom?’ En kartläggning av romska barns och elevers skolsituation i fem pilotkommuner för Skolverket [‘Mummy, shall I tell that I am a Roma?’ Mapping the school situation of Romani children and pupils in five pilot municipalities for the National Agency for Education.] Bilaga i Skolverkets Delredovisning av regeringsuppdrag inom regeringens strategi för romsk inkludering till Länsstyrelsen, Dnr A2012/1387/DISK. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_ xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fw p ubext%2Ftrycksak%2FBlob%2Fpdf3015.pdf%3Fk%3D3015 Santiago, C., & Maya, O. (2012). Segregación escolar del alumnado gitano en España [School segregation of Roma students in Spain.] Córdoba, Spain: Federación Nacional de Asociaciones de Mujeres Gitanas KAMIRA & Fundación Mario Maya. Retrieved from http://federacionkamira.es/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ Informe-de-Segregaci%C3%B3n.pdf Scherr, A. & Sachs, L. (2017). Bildungsbiografien von Sinti und Roma. Erfolgreiche Bildungsverläufe unter schwierigen Bedingungen. Weinheim, Juventa. Senato della Repubblica. (2011). Sintesi del rapporto conclusivo dell’indagine sulla condizione di Rom, Sinti e Caminanti in Italia. [Summary of the final report of the survey on the condition of Roma, Sinti and Caminanti in Italy.] Roma, Italy: Senato della Repubblica. Skolinspektionen. (2016). Beslut för förskoleklass och grundskola efter tillsyn i Hammarbyskolan belägen i Stockholms kommun. [The decision for the preschool class and the compulsory school after the inspection in Hammarbyskolan situated in the municipality of Stockholm.] Dnr 45-2015:10051. Retrieved from http://siris. skolverket.se/siris/ris.openfile?docID=555303 SOU. (2010):55. Romers rätt: en strategi för romer i Sverige. [Roma rights: A strategy for Roma in Sweden.] Statens offentliga utredningar. Stockholm, Sweden: Fritzes. Strauß, D. (Ed.). (2011). Studie zur aktuellen Bildungssituation deutscher Sinti und Roma. [Study on the current educational situation of German Sinti and Roma.] Retrieved from https://mediendienst-integration.de/fileadmin/Dateien/2011_Strauss_Studie_ Sinti_Bildung.pdf

202    Andrea Óhidy Surdu, L., & Switzer, F. (2015). Reading tales – An informal educational practice for social change. Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik, 1, 24–28. Szoboszlai, Zs. (2006): IDEA vagy VALÓSÁG? Az élethosszig tartó tanulás a roma társadalmi csoportok körében [IDEA or REALITY? Lifelong learning among Roma social groups.] In L. Lada (Ed.), Közvéleménykutatások az élethosszigtartó tanulásról. [Opinion polls on lifelong learning] (pp. 31–52). Budapest, Hungary: Nemzeti Felnőttképzési Intézet. Tarnovschi, D. (2012). Roma from Romania, Bulgaria, Italy and Spain. Comparative study. Bucharest, Romania: Soros Foundation Romania. Trentin, R., Monaci, M. G., De Lumèc, F., & Zanon, O. (2006). Scholastic integration of Gypsies in Italy: Teachers’ attitudes and experience. School Psychology International, 27(1), 79–103. Tyldum, G., & Friberg, J. H. (2014). Et skritt påveien. Evaluering av Handlingsplan for å bedre levekårene blant rom i Oslo. [First step: Evaluation of the action plan to improve the living conditions of Roma in Oslo.] FAFO Report (Vol. 50). FAFO, Oslo, Norway. Vargas, J., & Gómez, J. (2003). Why Roma do not like mainstream schools: Voices of a people without territory. Harvard Educational Review, 73(4), 559–590. Varnava-Skoura, G., Vergidis, D., & Kassimi, C. (2012). Greece: On mechanisms and successive programmes between support and innovation. In M. Demeuse, D. Frandji, D. Greger, & J. Y. Rochex (Eds.), Educational policies and inequalities in Europe | (pp. 127–154). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Vergidis, D. (1995). Νϵορατσισμόςκαισχολϵίο – ηπϵρίπτωσητωντσιγγανοπαίδων – [Εισήγησηστο 7ο Εκπαιδϵυτικό Συνέδριοτης Σ. Ε. (1,2,3-12-1994) μϵθέμα: «Ηβίαστοσχολικόχώρο».] [Neoracism and school – The case of Roma children – Presentation at the 7th Congress of Education S.E. (1,2,3-12-1994) on “Violence in the school”.] Sighroni Ekpaideusi, 81, 51–62.

Index Note: Page numbers followed by ”n” indicate footnotes. Absenteeism, 73, 74, 98, 102, 142, 148–150, 167 Academic Capital Formation, 171 Action plan, 18, 20, 103–104 Adult education, 99–100, 164–165 Agnesbergs folkhögskola, 165 Antiziganism, 2, 28, 162 social situation and sustained influence of, 30–31 Aspropyrgos, 49 Athigganos, 43 Attainment, 1, 8–10, 98, 100 Attitude, 36 of appreciation and recognition, 30 of Roma organisations, 2n2 Average absenteeism, 150 life expectancy, 71 Baccagghiu, 68 Bergitka Roma, 4 Bilingual Roma class, closing down of, 167–168 Bottom-up movements, 16 Bougešti, 4 Boyasch, 4 Burgudzhii, 4 Caminanti, 4 Camminanti community, 68 Carpathian Roma, 4 Census, 42, 50, 64 Central and Eastern Europe, 9, 18, 63 Central Europe, 21, 173 Centrality of person, 79

Child labour, 71 Children, 75, 102 for nomadic pupils, 77 programmes to promote social inclusion and education, 79–80 schooling, 101 Children Welfare Service, 100 Cigány, 4 Circular mobility, 32 Citizen, 5, 7, 20 German, 29–30 Greek, 42 Spanish, 136 Citizenship, 122 Italian, 64, 69 Norwegian, 93, 101–102 Civil society representatives, 94 Class, 167–168 Collectivity, 46 College, 99 Communism, 6, 63, 66–67 Compulsory education, 140 Compulsory schooling, 163–164 Conflict Resolution, 147 Constitution, 29 Constitutional principle of non-discrimination, 114, 130–131 Contraceptive methods, 122 Council of Europe (CoE), 4, 16–17, 93–94 Council of Europe ad Hoc Committee of Experts on Roma (CAHROM), 97 Country studies, 4, 10–11

204   Index County Administrative Board in Stockholm County, 161 Cultural and linguistic diversity, 162–163 Culture, 31–32, 45–47, 102, 123–124, 136–137 of RSC population, 72–73 Curriculum adaptation, 141

Discrimination ethnic, 123 institutional, 38, 140 Diversity, 162–163 Dreams Teens Program, 126–130 Drizari, 4 Drop-out of school, 97–98 Dwelling status, 3

Dasikhanè, 66 Dawn of Learning, 28 educational attainment of Sinti and Roma, 33–34 policies and support programmes for Roma education, 34–36 for Roma in Europe, 8–10 Roma Minority in Germany, 28–29 self-designations, culture and language/s, 31–32 Sinti and Roma in education system in Germany, 32–33 social situation and sustained influence of antiziganism, 30–31 statistics and legal status of Sinti and Roma in Germany, 29–30 successful practical examples from perspective of Roma in Germany, 36–38 Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–2015), 9, 16–21, 34 Decision-making, 17, 147 Degeša, 4 Degree, 43, 47, 76, 99, 170 Department of Roma Measures, The, 103 Deprivation, 3, 7–8, 69, 121–122 Dialogic reading, 146 Dialogical model of conflict resolution, 147–148 Differences, 2, 5, 11, 27, 31, 43, 47–49, 102, 111, 118, 124, 170, 172 Disadvantages, 7–8 Discourse, 11, 15–16, 22, 30–31, 44, 49, 93

Early childhood education, 140 Eastern Europe, 5–7, 9, 16, 63 Education(al), 37 of children, 79–80 community participation, 147 policy concept, 8 political reform, 8 of Roma Children’ programme, 52–53 of RSC children, 73–74 situation, 2, 4, 10–11 system, 2, 10, 21–22, 32–34 Educational Act, 164, 174–175 Educational attainment of Roma, 142–144, 165–167 of Roma in Norway, 96–97 of Roma in Portugal, 124–125 of Sinti and Roma, 33–34 Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced Narratives on Schooling and Future’ project, 97n7, 104–108 Educational success of Roma, 55–57, 144, 147 Egiptano, 136 Egipto, 136 Elementary school, 97–98 Empirical data, 2–3 Employment, 138–139 Environment, 165 of collaboration, 80 social, 3, 9 ESO, 140 Ethnic discrimination, 123 Ethnic profession, 36 Ethnicity, 2, 102

Index    205 EU Framework, 9 EU-Framework for National Roma Integration Strategy, 22 Euro (European currency), 5 Europe 2020 strategy, 10 European charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML), 92 European Commission (EC), 103 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), 164 European Projects, 80–81 European Roma and Travellers Forum (ERTF), 17 European Roma Grassroots Organizations Network (ERGO), 19 European Roma Information Office (ERIO), 17 European Roma Policy Coalition (ERPC), 18 European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC), 17, 18n12 European Union (EU), 16 European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA), 2, 9, 18n11, 70, 144 Evangelical Church of Philadelphia, 137 Exclusion, 4, 6–7, 30, 161 active and passive, 49 social, 44, 47, 53, 115 Exclusionary practices against Roma students, 49 Extending learning time, 146–147 Family education, 147 Ferkosi, 4 Fichiri, 4 First Mediator Programme (2012–2015), 171–174 Foreigner, 48n10 Formal schooling, 47 Forum of European Roma Young People (FERYP), 17

Framework Program of the European Commission (6th), 145 Freedom, 136 Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), 44 Gadje, 38 Gagikané, 67 German attitudes, 36 German Education System, 33–34 Germany Sinti and Roma in education system in, 32–33 statistics and legal status of Sinti and Roma in, 29–30 successful practical examples from perspective of Roma in, 36–38 Ghetto schools, 141 Ghettoisation, 69 Gitano, 4, 136 Gradesh, 4 Great Britain, 4n5 Greece, 51 data concerning Roma students’ school registration in, 50–51 Roma’s Educational Success in, 55–57 theoretical perspectives framing Roma’s education in, 47–49 Greek Education System, Roma in, 47 data concerning Roma students’ school registration in Greece, 50–51 exclusionary practices against Roma students, 49 policies and supportive educational programs, 51–52 theoretical perspectives framing Roma’s education in Greece, 47–49 Greek Law, 53 Growth, 10, 71, 82 Gypsy, 4, 31, 47n8 Gypsy-Intelligence Agency (see Zigeuner-Nachrichtenstellen)

206   Index Hamburgs model, 36 Health, 137–138 situation, 7 Heterogeneity of Roma Population in Sweden, 161 Hidden minority, 2, 64–68 High school, 50, 54, 142, 165 Higher education, 140 Attainment, 67 Roma in, 168–169 Holocaust, 28, 93 Horahane Roma, 4 Housing, 139–140 conditions, 8 market, 7–8, 139 situation, 68–70, 94, 120, 160 Human rights, 15–23 Illiteracy, 93, 99, 143 INCLUD-ED project, 144–148 Inclusion Roma, 55, 72 social, 79–80 Inclusive Education, 84 Inclusive school, 79 Informal learning, 9 Institutional discrimination, 38, 140 Institutional support, 22 Integrated Plan for the Roma in Catalonia (4th), 144 Interactive groups, 146 Intercultural education, 47–48 policies, 49 Interculturalism, 79 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 77 Intersectional social discrimination, Invasion of Roma from Romania, 67 Iron Curtain, 6, 30 Italian school system, 76 Italy, 4–6, 63, 80, 129 key areas of Matrix Project, 82 minority in, 64–65 nomadic population, 64 Roma populations in, 65

SMILE Project Recommendations for School Inclusion of Roma Pupils, 81 spatial isolation, 8 Targets of Sar San 2.0 Project, 83 Kaale Roma, 4 Kalaidzhii, 4 Kale/Kalo, 4 Kale subgroup, 136 Kelderash/Kaldashari, 4 Kvens, 102 Labour market, 7 Lacio Drom, 77 Laho, 4 Language/s, 31–32, 45–47, 123–124, 136–137 of RSC population, 72–73 Learning processes, 75–76 Life expectancy, 6–7, 45, 64, 70–71, 138, 161 Lifelong learning, 1–2, 8–9 culture and language/s, 45–47 Education of Roma Children’ programme, 52–53 examples of Roma’s Educational Success in Greece, 55–57 number, groups, names and legal status, 42–44 provision of specialised support to socially vulnerable groups, 54–55 Roma in Greece, 42 Roma in Greek Education System, 47–52 social situation of Roma in Greece, 44–45 special secretariat for Roma Inclusion, 55 ZEP, 53–54 Little Egypt, 136 Living conditions, 3, 6, 8, 16–17, 20, 22, 30, 34, 43, 70, 167 Lovara, 4 Lower secondary school, 97–98

Index    207 Majority, 6, 7, 32, 44, 70–71, 124, 137, 139, 141, 144 Mandatory education, 70 Manuš, 4 Marginalisation, 6, 28, 71–73, 161–162, 168 Mediator programme, 170 Mediterranean states, 5 Mediterrani School, 148–150 Member state, 2, 6–7, 9, 16–17, 46, 51, 115–116 Mentoring programmes, 36, 38 Mentors, 37–38 Methoni, 136 Migrants, 26, 32, 34, 63, 92, 146, 148 Migration, 29, 32, 64, 67 Ministry of Education, 79 Minority Access’ Role Models project, 144 Monitoring, 19–20, 34, 121, 163 Mother tongue, 2–3, 101 education, 163, 165–166 teacher, 166, 169–170, 173–174 teaching, 171 tuition, 164, 168 Multicultural education, 47n9 Multiculturalism, 47n9 education, 81 Municipality of Oslo, 98–99, 103, 106 Muslim minority in Thrace, 42n1 Mutual Action Targeting Racism, Intolerance and Xenophobia project (Roma Matrix project), 81–82 National Agency for Education, 166 National minority, 163–164, 166 National Model for Inclusion in Italy, 79 National Strategy, 121–122 National Strategy for Roma Inclusion to 2020, 22–23 National Study on Roma Communities, 114, 117–118, 120, 125–126, 131

Nationality, 2 Nomadic camps, 69 Non-discrimination, constitutional principle of, 114, 130–131 Non-governmental organisation (NGO), 7 Non-Roma people, 122–123 school staff, 166–167 Norway Norwegian adults, 99 Norwegian education system, 96 Roma in education system in, 96–108 Roma minority in, 91–96 Observatory of Roma Communities, 131 OECD, 99 Office for Gypsy Issues, The, 101 Office for Nomads (see Ufficio Nomadi) Ombudsman for children, 90 Open Society Institute (OSI), 18 Opera Nomadi, 77n3–78 Operational Program for the Promotion of Education (OPRE), 114, 126–130 Opré Chavalé project, 127 Organic Law of Education, 140 Organization für Security and Co-operation (OSCE), 16–17 Panhellenic Cultural Educational Creative Female Roma Association, 47 Participation, 7–8, 18 certificate of, 170 educational community, 147 of Roma families, 150 Pathology of ghetto, 74 Pedagogy, 163 Pentecostal movement, 137 Pentecostalism, 137 Personal Data Protection Act 15 (1999), 135

208   Index Pilot municipalities, 166 Policies for Roma Education, 101–104, 126, 144–145 Policy Development and Capacity Building Program, 22 Policy making, 11 Policy measures, 9–10 Polska Roma, 4 Portugal Roma communities in, 114–124 Roma in Education System in, 124–130 Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain (PIGS), 5, 5n11 Portuguese Roma cities with highest number of, 118 by municipality, 116–117 population, 115 Portuguese territory, 125 Post-compulsory secondary education, 140 Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), 167 Poverty, 3, 7, 19, 44–45, 69, 71, 94, 115, 137 Prejudice, 2–3, 19, 34, 45, 51, 74, 78, 80, 84, 164 Primary education, 140 Primary school, 35, 48, 54, 81, 96, 100, 104, 143, 149 Professional, 45 monitoring teams, 34 qualifications, 120 training, 35–36, 45 Program Dreams Teens Program, 126–130 Mentoring programmes, 36, 38 OPRE, RESCUR and Dreams Teens Programs, 126–130 Supportive educational programs, 51–52 Project European Projects, 80–81 Future project, 104–108 INCLUD-ED project, 144–148 INSETRom project, 80

Minority Access’ Role Models project, 144 Opré Chavalé project, 127 Roma Matrix project, 81–82 ’Roma Schooling’ project, 82 Targets of Sar San 2.0 Project, 83 WORKALÓ project, 144 Public discussion, 2–3 Pupil nomadic, 77 Roma, 101–103, 167 Qualification, 18, 71, 82, 99, 119–121, 124, 126, 131 Reality, 18–21 Reception Classes, 53n1 Religion, 42–43, 48, 50, 64, 67, 76, 169, 172 Repatriated people, 48n10 Reports, 21–22, 29, 42, 64, 96–97, 103 2014 FOESSA Report, 136 RESCUR program, 126–130 Role models, 143 Roma, 3–4, 63–64 adults, 93 camps (see Nomadic camps) culture, 123–124 in education system, 32–33 educational attainment in German Education System, 33–34 Educational Success in Greece, 55–57 in Greek Education System, 42–43, 47–52 in Higher Education, 168–169 identity, 3–4 inclusion, 55, 72 income, 44–45 law, 124 pilot, 105n8, 107 policy, 16 populations, 65–67 pupils, 101–103, 167 and Romani people, 91–92 self-organisation and positions of European Institutions, 16–18

Index    209 social movement, 16 social situation of, 44–45 statistics and legal status of, 29–30 successful practical examples from perspective of Roma, 36–38 Roma, Sinti and Caminanti population (RSC population), 64 accessing to education system, 74–76 culture and language, 72–73 education of RSC children, 73–74 European Projects, 80–81 hidden minority, 64–68 housing and health conditions, 69–70 programmes to promoting social inclusion and education of children, 79–80 projects supported by municipalities, 81–83 rights and policies to support education, 76–79 situation of children and youth, 71 social situation, 69 work situation, 71–72 Roma Advisory Council of Catalonia, 144 Roma communities, 3, 94–95, 147 culture and language/s, 123–124 in Portugal, 114 Roma numbers and distribution, 114–115 social situation, 115–123 Roma Communities Observatory, 114 Roma Culture Class, 167 Roma education, policies and support programmes for, 34–36 Roma Education Fund (REF), 9, 19, 21–22 Roma Education Fund, 9 Roma in education system adult education, 99–100 college and university, 99 educational attainment, 96–97, 124–125, 142–144 Educational Situation for Roma Pupils in Norway: Silenced

Narratives on Schooling and project, 97n7, 104–108 elementary school and lower secondary school, 97–98 explanations on low educational attainment of Roma in Norway, 100–101 Norwegian education system, 96 OPRE, RESCUR and Dreams Teens Programs, 126–130 policies and support programmes, 101–104, 126, 144–145 in Portugal, 124 Spanish Education System, 140–142 upper secondary school, 98–99 Roma Integration, 19, 22–23, 51 Roma Kulturklass, 167 Roma Mediators (ROMED), 170 Roma minority, 3 challenges for future, 160 culture and language, 94–96, 136–137 disadvantages and multiple deprivations, 7–8 employment, 138–139 groups, numbers and legal status, 91–93 health, 137–138 housing, 139–140 marginalised in society, 161–162 number, groups, names and legal status, 135–136 in selected Western and Southern European countries, 4–7 social situation, 93–94, 137 in Sweden, 159 Roma Minority in Germany, 28–29 ’Roma Schooling’ project, 82 Roma Task Force, 9 Romanés, 92, 96 Romanesque, 73 Romani chib, 4, 32, 161, 169 Romani NGOs, 166 Romani people, 4, 46, 92 ROMED model, 36 Romlos, 105n8, 107

210   Index Romlostjenesten (RLT), 104–105 Romungro/Rumungro, 4 Samis, 102 Sar San 2.0 Project in Italy, 83 Schengen agreement, 4, 6–7, 30 Scholarship, 19, 21–22, 34, 38, 82, 127–128 School absenteeism, 74 assistants, 107 mediator, 107 School Social Action Services (SASE), 126 Schools as Learning Communities, 148–150 Scientific research, 2–3 Secondary school, 33, 37–38, 48, 50–52, 74, 82 lower, 96–98 upper, 98–99 Segmentation by age, 122 Segregation, 3, 8–9, 21, 70, 72–73, 93, 121, 141 Self-chosen mentors, 37 Self-designation, 3 Self-designations, 31–32 Servike Roma, 4 Similarities, 5, 10–11, 63 Sinti, 4, 67–68 in education system, 32–33 educational attainment in German Education System, 33–34 statistics and legal status of, 29–30 Sinti Emi-liani, 68 Sinti Giostrai (see Sinti) Sinti Lombardi, 68 Sinti Piemontesi, 68 Sinti Veneti, 68 Skarpnäcks folkhögskola, 165 Slovakia, 4n8, 5, 9, 20, 44, 80 Social and educational inclusion of Roma People through SEAs, 145–148 Social housing, 120–121, 139 Social inclusion, 79–80

Social Integration Income, 119, 126 Social integration of Roma communities, 119, 121 Social mobility, 7, 31, 56, 174 Social situation of antiziganism, 30–31 Socialist, 6, 31 Socio-economic situation of Roma communities, 122 Södertörn model, 169–171 Södertörn University, 169 Southern Europe, 2, 6, 8 Southern European countries, 5 Soviet Union, 5–6, 67 Spain, Roma minority in, 135–140 Spanish Education System, 140–142 Spanish Educational Law, 140–142 Spanish Roma, 136 Spanish Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012–2020, 144 Spatial segregation, 8, 70 Special school, 33, 37, 77, 141 Språkrådet (Language Council), 162–163 Stakeholder, 55, 84 Statistics and legal status of Sinti and Roma in Germany, 29–30 Stereotype, 23, 51, 125, 147 Stereotypical image of Roma, 45 Stigmatisation, 2, 4, 84, 121 Strategy for integration of Roma communities 2013–2020, 114 Strategy for Roma Inclusion, 159–160, 162, 166, 168 Students’ school assignment, 141 Subgroup, 136 Successful Educational Actions (SEAs), 144 social and educational inclusion of Roma People through, 145–148 Sundbybergs folkhögskola, 165 Support programmes for Roma Education, 101–104, 144–145 Support programs for Roma Education, 126

Index    211 Supporting Motivation to Intervene on Learning and Experience (SMILE), 80–81 Supportive educational programs, 51–52 Supportive Tutorial Classes, 53n2 Survey, 19, 30, 78, 94, 115 to Roma people, 117n2 Sustained influence of antiziganism, 30–31 Sweden heterogeneity of Roma Population in, 161 Roma minority in, 159 Swedish Education System, 163–165 closing down of bilingual Roma class, 167–168 educational attainment of Roma, 165–167 First Mediator Programme (2012–2015), 171–174 Roma in, 163 Roma in Higher Education, 168–169 Södertörn model, 169–171 Swedish Gypsy Mission, 160 Swedish Inheritance Fund, 166 Swedish Roma, 160 Teachers Inservice Training for Roma Inclusion project (INSETRom project), 80 Temporary allowances, 119 ternYpe, 19–20 Top-down approaches, 16 Torbjørg Bay, 94 Trading, 44 Tradition, 48 Traditional Roma culture, 46 Transcontinental Romani diaspora, 16 Traveller Education Services (TESs), 56 Tsigganoi, 4 Tsigganos, 43 Turkish Roma, 4 Tutored libraries, 146–147

Ufficio Nazionale Antidiscriminazioni Razziali (UNAR), 64 Ufficio Nomadi, 83 Umbrella term, 8, 63 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), 98 UN’s Human Development Index, 101 Unemployment, 3, 19, 64, 71–72, 119, 122, 149 UNESCO, 175 Ungrike Roma, 4 United Nations Development Program (UNDP), 18n10 Universal Declaration on Human Rights (1948), 77 Universalism, 79 University, 99 Upper secondary school, 98–99 Val di Noto earthquake, 68 Vlach Roma, 92, 94 Vlach/Vlah/Vlax, 4 Vlachike Roma, 4 Vocational education, 52, 55 Vocational training, 96, 98–101, 140, 143, 162, 165 Voice of Roma (VoR), 17 Walachian Roma, 4 Welfare systems, 6, 161 Western European countries, 6–7, 29 Work, 118–119 WORKALÓ project, 144 World Bank, 18n8 World Romani Congress, 4, 4n5 World War II, 28, 66, 93, 104 Yerlii, 4 Zigeuner, 4, 29, 31 Zigeuner-Nachrichtenstellen, 28 Zones of Educational Priority (ZEP), 53–54 Žuže, 4